From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Edward O'Connor" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: gratuitous changes Date: Tue, 04 Feb 2003 17:59:57 -0500 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <20030204155741.B75B.LEKTU@terra.es> <2110-Tue04Feb2003214642+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il> <20030204211350.DE42.LEKTU@terra.es> <200302042022.h14KMPN23253@rum.cs.yale.edu> <15936.9792.971817.964555@nick.uklinux.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1044399579 1542 80.91.224.249 (4 Feb 2003 22:59:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 4 Feb 2003 22:59:39 +0000 (UTC) Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18gC2R-0000OR-00 for ; Tue, 04 Feb 2003 23:59:35 +0100 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 18gCAj-0001qF-00 for ; Wed, 05 Feb 2003 00:08:09 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 18gC2M-00069Y-06 for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Tue, 04 Feb 2003 17:59:30 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 18gC14-0005m7-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Feb 2003 17:58:10 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 18gC0r-0005fz-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Feb 2003 17:58:05 -0500 Original-Received: from amalthea.teisoft.com ([12.109.66.146] helo=george.floobin.cx) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 18gC0b-0005LP-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 04 Feb 2003 17:57:41 -0500 Original-Received: (from ted@localhost) by george.floobin.cx (8.11.3/8.11.3) id h14MxvZ27366; Tue, 4 Feb 2003 17:59:57 -0500 Original-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Attribution: Ted X-Face: #()Nun50FWhQvC^2/~=QQ`5c#28BjpE|dM0G']o]qVVKi2jHFqRFo[kGYloI wU"N>Hhz0pS10c.yki^~3l{=.h@l\-*G\P"@C!JZ,XZLJqv`,{)XUpo8qYu::fXJ[` QdcFF}p%kQ#wD@mA.\CxU_#gVKOC.n/5LM/9paO\>A9<^fdNH(||@C0I'bB(f]WHYB *ZEgQzA/6/-4~vf?NUd6JN"ocE@Q(^)Ryity|#4n>p\c4Y2`n=hfn\w-oRF|@- In-Reply-To: <15936.9792.971817.964555@nick.uklinux.net> (Nick Roberts's message of "Tue, 4 Feb 2003 20:44:48 +0000") User-Agent: Gnus/5.090015 (Oort Gnus v0.15) Emacs/21.3.50 (i686-pc-linux-gnu) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5 Precedence: list List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:11359 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:11359 My $0.02 regarding removing extraneous whitespace, ?\ , etc: It seems like the occurances of ?\ and ?\ (?\SPC and ?\TAB) in source files is probably pretty minimal. In the particular case of ?\ , we have a perfectly good and arguably more readable substitute in ?\t, so why don't we adopt a good and arguably more readable substitute for ?\ , say, ?\s? Ted, who thinks (setq foo ?\ ) looks strange -- Edward O'Connor ted@oconnor.cx Ense petit placidam sub libertate quietem.