Re: Instead of pcase

[Dmitry Gutov]

On 19/11/2023 20:30, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Sun, 19 Nov 2023 20:04:56 +0200
> > Cc: michael_heerdegen@web.de, luangruo@yahoo.com, jporterbugs@gmail.com,
> >   rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> > From: Dmitry Gutov <dmitry@gutov.dev>
> >
> > > > I don't see calls for prohibiting those implementation styles, in the
> > > > previous messages, or anywhere. It would be impractical anyway.
> > >
> > > I wasn't talking about prohibiting, I was talking about accepting that
> > > both sides have a right to describe their experiences.
> >
> > Perhaps you'll consider posting a message supporting both positions, then.
>
> I don't understand what you mean by "supporting both positions".  How
> is it possible for a person to support two opposite positions?

For example:

  I understand you guys and you guys, but we're not going to do any
  major changes (for the usual compatibility reasons, for example),
  though we would consider some minor improvements if either of you
  can suggest any.

> > > > > > OTOH, enacting a ban on particular abstractions will just about
> > > > > > guarantee that certain kinds of features will not be implemented.
> > > > > That's a strawman: no one of those who set policies here suggested any
> > > > > bans.  One should be able to post opinions for and against certain
> > > > > coding styles without being accuse in mortal sins.
> > > >
> > > > No one is arguing about whether people are allowed to post opinions.
> > > >
> > > > There have been a few calls for working toward dropping pcase or cl-lib
> > > > from the Emacs core, however.
> > >
> > > You need to know to whom you listen, before you make such far-reaching
> > > conclusions.
> >
> > I don't think I've made any specific conclusion (or any predictions).
>
> So your reference to "enacting a ban" is not a conclusion?  Then why
> are you condemning something about which you still didn't reach any
> specific conclusions?

I haven't made any predictions or conclusions as to whether a ban is 
forthcoming.

Sometimes it helps to anticipate any such action, though, for example 
because many leaders feel it difficult to change position once a public 
declaration has been made.

> > But when some prolific contributors make such statements, and RMS is
> > noticeably on their side, that can't help but create a certain
> > impression to the public (this list is read not just by the core
> > contributors).
>
> That impression is unjustified, and acting on it raises the level of
> unnecessary flames, and is not otherwise useful in any way.

I'd like to help avoid it being made, on various observers.