* Aidan Kehoe <kehoea(a)parhasard.net> writes:
Ar an seachtú lá déag de mí Iúil, scríobh Stephen J. Turnbull:
> [...] This introduces a serious backward incompatibility with GNU Emacs
> and XEmacs 21.4, without adding functionality beyond an attractive
A forward compatibility problem rather than one of backward
surely? #r"your text here" gives a syntax error in 21.4 and GNU Emacs, so
there’s no code in the wild for those platforms that uses that syntax, old
code works fine.
Compatibility problems will arise when people choose to use raw
syntax in code they release, which I agree should not be done for a few
It's not much, but perhaps a little better than relying on an error.
And attractive convenience _is_ added functionality!
> There is a policy question here, and it should be discussed
> (including whether we should be more interested in compatibility
> with SXEmacs than GNU Emacs!) before committing IMO.
Obviously I have a vested interest in XEmacs and SXEmacs staying
compatible with each other. But, at this point in time, I see the
responsibility of maintaining compatibility resting on SXEmacs'
shoulders, not XEmacs'.
Please don't veto solely on the grounds of (in)compatibility. If
something is worth having in XEmacs, there's a very good chance it is
worth having in SXEmacs too. And vice verse.
As for raw stings, we like em, we want you to have em, and we want
GNU/Emacs to have em too.
 So much so that we use them in all of our core lisp.
 Martin has mentioned that he is willing to assign his copyright
and to put together a patch for GNU/Emacs.
|---<Steve Youngs>---------------<GnuPG KeyID: A94B3003>---|
| I am Dyslexic of Borg. |
| Fusistance is retile. Your arse will be laminated. |