|
| From: | Dmitry Gutov |
| Subject: | Re: [Emacs-diffs] emacs-25 b6d6304: Comment on last change to define-derived-mode |
| Date: | Fri, 4 Mar 2016 18:10:17 +0200 |
| User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.0 |
On 03/04/2016 04:26 PM, Stefan Monnier wrote:
That should at least give one example where adding (indent 3) hurts.define-derived-mode is available since at least emacs 22.1 without any (indent N) settings. I think maybe it is better to think in the other direction that is what does (indent 3) bring to the table?That's irrelevant to the issue of having to documenting *why* you revert something.
Putting a code sample into the comment right there would be pretty awkward, though. I'd rather see a message to emacs-devel or a bug report, and a link to either in the reverting commit.
In this case, though, maybe we should revert the revert, all things considered.
| [Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |