Re: Not protecting Lisp objects from GC

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Gerd Möllmann <gerd.moellmann@gmail.com>
> Cc: tomas@tuxteam.de,  emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2025 21:04:31 +0100
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> 
> >> From: Gerd Möllmann <gerd.moellmann@gmail.com>
> >> Cc: tomas@tuxteam.de,  emacs-devel@gnu.org
> >> Date: Mon, 27 Jan 2025 20:57:12 +0100
> >> 
> >> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
> >> 
> >> >> From: Gerd Möllmann <gerd.moellmann@gmail.com>>> >> Stubbornness is not 
> >> >> a virtue. If you feel insecure in GC things, how
> >> >> >> about delegating that part to other co-maintainers, who I guess are 
> >> >> >> also
> >> >> >> at the steering wheel?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Sorry, Gerd. For me, this just jumps the shark.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Cheers
> >> >> 
> >> >> You can't have followed the discussions and not get the impression that
> >> >> Eli isn't exactly an expert in GC things. And that is relevant, not
> >> >> absurd.
> >> >
> >> > Once again: my objections were not because of the effects on the GC
> >> > code.
> >> 
> >> This is not about a specific patch or something.
> >> 
> >> Tomas was basically saying my thought of delegating GC stuff to another
> >> maintainer was ridiculous.
> >
> > I didn't respond to what Tomas was saying, I responded to what you
> > were saying about my being non-expert on this and that.
> 
> And? Does it make my statement that you are not an expert on GC untrue?

It's simply irrelevant.

> And would that fact not be relevant for deciding to delegate or not?

No.