From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jeff Clough Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Guile in Emacs Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 10:25:49 -0400 Message-ID: References: <4B8147A9.7030504@gmail.com> <87aauiho3y.fsf_-_@lifelogs.com> <1271028837.6164.55.camel@dell-desktop.example.com> <1271102739.6067.38.camel@dell-desktop.example.com> <8039yz34ka.fsf@tiny.isode.net> <1271173887.6067.53.camel@dell-desktop.example.com> <87FA5F05CB9C41409B9E72BD06D7C8CF@us.oracle.com> <87fx2xp839.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <3EFDD45EB5AD4018B8FEA8F13CFEDA32@us.oracle.com> <345707DD850E4DBAAD1ACA687DC5A514@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1271427983 3509 80.91.229.12 (16 Apr 2010 14:26:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 16 Apr 2010 14:26:23 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 'David Kastrup' , Drew Adams , "emacs-devel@gnu.org" To: Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Apr 16 16:26:21 2010 connect(): No such file or directory Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O2mUr-0005Np-IG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 16:26:17 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34466 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1O2mUq-0003R0-Mm for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 10:26:16 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1O2mUj-0003P4-9t for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 10:26:09 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=45200 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1O2mUd-0003MO-IE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 10:26:08 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O2mUS-0000eW-OX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 10:26:02 -0400 Original-Received: from hrndva-omtalb.mail.rr.com ([71.74.56.122]:34861) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1O2mUS-0000e1-6s; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 10:25:52 -0400 X-Authority-Analysis: v=1.1 cv=LStmOzECkPR9xsMk4mw8zTEuC0H5p2ZSOXz5TIvtHNE= c=1 sm=0 a=kj9zAlcOel0A:10 a=wN3dDBks/ChO7xvezkoALQ==:17 a=qb5RLdrWAAAA:8 a=O2KRN8bHAAAA:8 a=HwfNt6ZFtCy2oOkjycMA:9 a=Xlq6-PwO8saj9G71iE5nPiaQWvcA:4 a=CjuIK1q_8ugA:10 a=Mbv68m0LDs4A:10 a=-a4hDESKBCwA:10 a=wN3dDBks/ChO7xvezkoALQ==:117 X-Cloudmark-Score: 0 X-Originating-IP: 74.70.71.134 Original-Received: from [74.70.71.134] ([74.70.71.134:51172] helo=logrus.localdomain) by hrndva-oedge03.mail.rr.com (envelope-from ) (ecelerity 2.2.2.39 r()) with ESMTP id 5C/9F-19557-E6378CB4; Fri, 16 Apr 2010 14:25:51 +0000 In-Reply-To: (christian lynbech's message of "Fri, 16 Apr 2010 16:03:13 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.95 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:123760 Archived-At: writes: >>>>>> "Jeff" == Jeff Clough writes: > > Jeff> I am stating that the four manuals + describe-function, et al, are > Jeff> a great arrangment > > I fail to see why 5 manuals are significantly worse than 4 manuals as > long as there is a clear separation between them. At this point I'm just going to assume that I'm either being unreasonable and not knowing it or that I'm not able to properly explain my reasoning concerning this. I believe that Emacs works perfectly with the four manuals it has today. I fail to see how a fifth manual would improve it. That a fifth manual would not make things "significantly worse" isn't a glowing endorsement. Regardless, I think I've explained myself here as best as I am able to. When/if the change is made, I'm sure I'll be able to see for myself how much of an effect it has and I may even be pleasantly surprised. Jeff