Re: [Q] Re: [xemacs-base] Add byte-compiler warning control library
Steve Youngs writes:
> I'm not sure that that is correct though; the package
version
> should presumably be used when explicitly requiring from another
> package.
That sounds like crazy talk to me. :-)
Not really. More like "broken by design." Consider, packages are
supposed to be version-independent, but the main use of
package-suppress is to cater to version-specific differences in
location of some libraries. So a package wants version-independent
code (unless it knows what it's doing).
This is not the same as replacing a broken function with a fixed one,
I think. This is taking a package internal because you want to change
its API and semantics. That was Ben's explicit intention.
My head hurts....
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://calypso.tux.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta