Re: scratch/igc: Implications of MPS being asynchronous

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Stefan Kangas <stefankangas@gmail.com>
> Date: Sun, 12 Jan 2025 13:07:05 +0000
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, pipcet@protonmail.com, gerd@gnu.org
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> 
> >> Do you have a better word to propose here than "asynchronous"?
> >
> > I don't think this aspect of MPS is very important to us.  So I would
> > suggest simply dropping that part.
> 
> Do you suggest dropping the words "synchronous" and "asynchronous", or
> not documenting this at all?

This aspect of GC is not different between the two GC's.  So I don't
think it is useful to have that in the document, which basically
describes the differences (and does that very well, IMO).