[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Oddities with dynamic modules
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: Oddities with dynamic modules |
Date: |
Fri, 22 Mar 2019 11:20:48 +0300 |
> From: Philipp Stephani <address@hidden>
> Date: Thu, 21 Mar 2019 21:58:11 +0100
> Cc: Emacs developers <address@hidden>
>
> > No, it's not only of historical interest, because we can add
> > functions.
>
> That's true, and I agree for those we should find some clearer critera
> than "best judgment" or philosophical vague principles like
> "simplicity."
> [...]
> For example, I'd vote for adding timespec and bignum conversion
> functions based on (2).
I agree with the last proposal.
But I also think that we need a lot more convenience wrappers even for
existing functionalities. Any non-trivial module whose code I ever
saw is a clear evidence to that, as they all introduce their own
wrappers for practically the same purposes.
- Re: creating unibyte strings, (continued)
- Re: creating unibyte strings, Elias Mårtenson, 2019/03/24
- Re: creating unibyte strings, Eli Zaretskii, 2019/03/24
- Re: creating unibyte strings, Elias Mårtenson, 2019/03/24
- Re: creating unibyte strings, Eli Zaretskii, 2019/03/24
- Re: creating unibyte strings, Elias Mårtenson, 2019/03/26
- Re: creating unibyte strings, Stefan Monnier, 2019/03/26
- Re: Oddities with dynamic modules,
Eli Zaretskii <=