|
| From: | Kevin Rodgers |
| Subject: | Re: cc-langs.el |
| Date: | Fri, 29 Aug 2003 12:49:39 -0600 |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; SunOS i86pc; en-US; rv:0.9.4.1) Gecko/20020406 Netscape6/6.2.2 |
Richard Stallman wrote:
> To concretize the discussion, I think the following functions are
> generally useful and haven't got any direct counterparts in the
> current set:
>
> Sorry, that is far too much.
For what reason? The work of updating the manual?
I don't even want to think about that many different functions, sorry.
Martin's list has 82 functions. In comparison, lisp/files.el defines 83 functions, lisp/simple.el defines 152 function, and src/*.c defines 1,058 (Lisp) functions. The Common Lisp functions have a well-specified interface, and adding new functions (vs. modifying existing functions) should not affect Emacs' behavior. What's to think about? -- Kevin Rodgers
| [Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |