Re: Code for cond*

[Emanuel Berg]

Ihor Radchenko wrote:

>>> FYI, I cannot understand the argument you are making.
>>
>> It was not addressed specifically to you. My point is that
>> the same crowd who were defending cl-lib and pcase as
>> though their life was at stake are now pushing for the
>> exclusion of an alternative, which everyone can see the
>> irony in.
>
> I am not sure if pointing this out is constructive.
> Coming from the same crowd or not, the useful arguments
> should be considered.

Yes but we heard from you that the goal was to replace
`pcase'. It was the view of two people. The third is not here,
he is staying low?

If you say it right out, that is your agenda, so if the goal
is the replace pcase, we see the install of cond* as a first
step on that plan.

-- 
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal