wmperry(a)aventail.com (William M. Perry) writes: Close, but no cigar! :-) What I meant was that our abstraction layer line between "interface" and "implementation" is currently drawn somewhere around C<->elisp distinction (with the exception of some code in lisp/ that can also be consider "implementation"). Specifically, this means that we can play around with the C code as much as we like, and noone will get burnt. Now, if we announce the modules support for 21.1, we'll have to make it damn sure that we know *exactly* what we're doing. Suddenly, when making changes to XEmacs, we'll have to consider not only the compatibility with old Lisp code, but the compatibility with old C code. We'll also have to make the same interface<->implementation distinction within the C code, and somehow announce which parts of the interface are cast in stone, and which are liable to change. I don't think XEmacs C code is ready for this sort of thing. -- Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic(a)srce.hr&gt; | Student at FER Zagreb, Croatia --------------------------------+-------------------------------- Try to use "ad nauseam" at least once per flame. It doesn't mean anything; but it gives that polished feel to your postings.