[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Code for cond*
From: |
Emanuel Berg |
Subject: |
Re: Code for cond* |
Date: |
Thu, 25 Jan 2024 14:56:34 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) |
Po Lu wrote:
> Am I to understand that allowing package authors to replace
> instances of pcase with cond* at their own discretion is
> a "hooligan move?"
The problem is that so many files don't have their own active
maintainer. If that was the case, that would be much better,
yes. And it would decrease the burden of maintaining so many
files for just a small bunch of people.
Now, if those people are bent on the idea of replacing `pcase'
with cond* all over and across those files, that would be
a huge waste of time and effort, it wouldn't make Emacs any
better, various veteran contributors would be alienated, and
it would also be a pretty ugly purge just in general - for,
again, very unclear reasons.
--
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal
- Re: Code for cond*, (continued)
- Re: Code for cond*, Emanuel Berg, 2024/01/24
- Re: Code for cond*, Alan Mackenzie, 2024/01/24
- Re: Code for cond*, Emanuel Berg, 2024/01/24
- Re: Code for cond*, Po Lu, 2024/01/25
- Re: Code for cond*, Emanuel Berg, 2024/01/25
- Re: Code for cond*, Po Lu, 2024/01/25
- Re: Code for cond*,
Emanuel Berg <=
- Re: Code for cond*, Stefan Kangas, 2024/01/25
Re: Code for cond*, Richard Stallman, 2024/01/19
Re: Code for cond*, Stefan Monnier, 2024/01/23
- Re: Code for cond*, JD Smith, 2024/01/23
- Re: Code for cond*, Stefan Kangas, 2024/01/24
- Re: Code for cond*, JD Smith, 2024/01/24
- Re: Code for cond*, Stefan Monnier, 2024/01/24
- Re: Code for cond*, Stefan Monnier, 2024/01/24
- Re: Code for cond*, JD Smith, 2024/01/24
- Re: Code for cond*, Stefan Monnier, 2024/01/24