Re: [Emacs-diffs] emacs-25 b6d6304: Comment on last change to define-derived-mode

[Stefan Monnier]

FWIW, I'm really sorry to have occasioned this longwinded
bike-shedding.  My *only* point was to ask to get some concrete example
where the patch was undesirable, so that we know concretely why the
change was undone.
I did not intend to put in doubt the validity of the reversion.


        Stefan


>>> That should at least give one example where adding (indent 3) hurts.
>> define-derived-mode is available since at least emacs 22.1 without any
>> (indent N) settings. I think maybe it is better to think in the other
>> direction that is what does (indent 3) bring to the table?

> That's irrelevant to the issue of having to documenting *why* you
> revert something.


>         Stefan