Re: Code for cond*

[Emanuel Berg]

Ihor Radchenko wrote:

>>> 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?
>
> This is not my view. This is my understanding of
> RMS' intent.
>
> My view is "anything that improves Emacs is good". I do not
> have more specific goals in this thread.

Sorry for the confusion, you are right, I replied to your post
technically but actually said that to the person _you_
were quoting.

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