From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: John Wiegley Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#22819: 25.0.91; Don't try to indent region if the buffer is read-only Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2017 14:31:38 -0700 Message-ID: References: <87vam26amc.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <83lgmywlo4.fsf@gnu.org> <83y3qtswvv.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1502227930 1291 195.159.176.226 (8 Aug 2017 21:32:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 8 Aug 2017 21:32:10 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.130016 (Ma Gnus v0.16) Emacs/25.2.50 (darwin) Cc: 22819@debbugs.gnu.org, npostavs@users.sourceforge.net To: Kaushal Modi Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Aug 08 23:32:06 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dfC6f-00004y-Um for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 08 Aug 2017 23:32:06 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44595 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dfC6m-0007sq-9k for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 08 Aug 2017 17:32:12 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59729) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dfC6e-0007sV-TQ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Aug 2017 17:32:06 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dfC6c-00014K-8u for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Aug 2017 17:32:04 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:43626) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dfC6c-00014D-4d for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Aug 2017 17:32:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dfC6b-00041F-Ra for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 08 Aug 2017 17:32:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: John Wiegley Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 08 Aug 2017 21:32:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 22819 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Original-Received: via spool by 22819-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B22819.150222792115443 (code B ref 22819); Tue, 08 Aug 2017 21:32:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 22819) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Aug 2017 21:32:01 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52307 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dfC6a-00040d-Qs for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 08 Aug 2017 17:32:01 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-pg0-f41.google.com ([74.125.83.41]:38159) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dfC6Z-0003tU-1r for 22819@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 08 Aug 2017 17:31:59 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-pg0-f41.google.com with SMTP id l64so19629622pge.5 for <22819@debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 08 Aug 2017 14:31:58 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:date:message-id:references :user-agent:mime-version; bh=gmrwGz4DxhLYpP5J/seoqGxFOh9BCYzrAE3rcE+4YmI=; b=AIAmnnXc7IA0LrPOhP7IJtYnguwsTSUubx3v5M4FM6UZ8+gbnvr7Nhz50bJGd2WCgj HpHAWOiNydLnduCKearqGVXLScodhxiomkwUGNHXqzS/N/BLEWHEf8D8NTJc8gbpLwsL IPuW2fvvDdEByr+UGNm2aqQOAvrcn6oL7G0exHPQ1pXswXSSimIfX62t+My+eJcDo9Le ll1Q19SF46MEP52bTeJoD63bHErWJeK7xYt++1kF8WRH2x+/PGxoGOQvSEU6PcmYHai+ taAsNsfplbvEoktQMMv4M9jihS68RryDWDzmhlHoLYk+uKMgIXAGMz20tQLyvoGCUz0Y iqrg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:date:message-id :references:user-agent:mime-version; bh=gmrwGz4DxhLYpP5J/seoqGxFOh9BCYzrAE3rcE+4YmI=; b=aiV8TlyTc/EF10GJjyODAUPfeFQG7iDJnVpREzVtMQ3K181+hdxXPBcJn7R2bJwArm 2ShhAFt5WS8dm77W4goCKwkbsaPgWFj7y0jrP0/6d3EfdVPi5rBdlGEg6h47DfgsZC2V YSj+tTeRtQBHeca1VnFbrjwK9rV08MxDWbANdfffb5LQYxuBqiFOU0h00qOezZaimgPv XfjoRTeQ7ebG9urX8GknrY9OmhwFr6ig3JZnXmMddR/crk+8aDrxqKe+muGpn3C2sNBq jmfGFbLzwW6p8lyPecdXYBXgETxvlDj6qP9asCGx0+pauvdwAglBBkb4aar/ealOgj4W cyvQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AHYfb5hgi5UAMRmBJoZ+vqVwHLV2IOyQMLy0ceiqJzPk8pU4uSlXSQ8+ SF9z6xIyV4fFjdcXwQA= X-Received: by 10.84.177.67 with SMTP id w61mr6542817plb.112.1502227912876; Tue, 08 Aug 2017 14:31:52 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from Vulcan.local (76-234-69-149.lightspeed.frokca.sbcglobal.net. [76.234.69.149]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id v9sm3815660pgo.39.2017.08.08.14.31.51 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Tue, 08 Aug 2017 14:31:51 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-Original-From: "John Wiegley" Original-Received: by Vulcan.local (Postfix, from userid 501) id 2E3B57880AB1; Tue, 8 Aug 2017 14:31:50 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: (Kaushal Modi's message of "Tue, 08 Aug 2017 19:19:31 +0000") X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:135579 Archived-At: >>>>> "KM" == Kaushal Modi writes: KM> I don't know what the outcome should be in this case: KM> - No one raised any issue moving forward with this in that emacs-devel. Hello, Kaushal. It should be pointed out here that maintenance of Emacs is at the maintainers' discretion. Even though we do take the opinions of others into account, just because emacs-devel "hasn't raised an issue", does not mean that a change will happen. If Eli and I don't like it, the issue must wait for the next round of maintainers. There are a few factors why this change is being rejected now: a. It is a long-standing behavior, however less than ideal it is. We don't know what effect changing it will have, as obvious as it may seem. Our strongly-held policy is to avoid changes in long-standing behavior unless the reason to do so is compelling. b. The main force of your argument is that we waste CPU time when we don't need to, because we could just check before doing the indentation. I have no argument with that, and you're quite right. However, in all my years of using Emacs I've never run into this case, so I don't buy the argument that it is a change that needs to happen right now, for everyone. c. Emacs is designed to be extensible. Advise the indentation functions so they perform this check for you. It doesn't need to happen in core Emacs for you to get the behavior you want. If your wish is to defend the interests of the "silent majority", who all, without knowing it, would benefit from this change, then I appreciate your concern. However, as maintainers, and given the lack of other voices *asking* for this change, we prefer to retain the status quo, however far from perfect it may be. Plenty of projects on the Net strive to make every breaking change necessary to approximate the best version of what they're trying to accomplish. That's not how it is here. We want a stable, well-functioning Emacs with predictable behavior, and sometimes that means keeping things as they have been for decades -- even if, in hindsight, it shouldn't have been done that way. What I'm interested to learn is how many other cases like this exist, and whether a more general approach would make it less likely for it to occur. What if we could know, for example, whether a function will try to change the buffer, and simply stop the evaluation before it starts... -- John Wiegley GPG fingerprint = 4710 CF98 AF9B 327B B80F http://newartisans.com 60E1 46C4 BD1A 7AC1 4BA2