Re: seq.el and the complexity of Emacs Lisp.

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Ihor Radchenko <yantar92@posteo.net>
> Cc: Emanuel Berg <incal@dataswamp.org>, emacs-devel@gnu.org
> Date: Tue, 07 Nov 2023 12:38:49 +0000
> 
> Harald Judt <h.judt@gmx.at> writes:
> 
> > My response was targeted more at the general denial to code changes, not 
> > about 
> > this discussion about cl-lib. Your assumption that every change needs to be 
> > driven by benefit seems a bit short-sighted to me. It is probably good 
> > enough 
> > when you want to build something fast without having to care about it much 
> > later. Maybe it holds when you lack time because then not wasting time is a 
> > priority. But if you want to build something for long-term use, it might 
> > not 
> > be an optimal solution. Having to depend on immediate benefits to change 
> > anything also loses importance when time is not that much of a priority.
> 
> AFAIU, Eli's position in the past was exactly as Emanuel described - we
> do not change things unless there is a clear benefit of such change.
> 
> Eli, please correct me if my understanding is wrong.

You are not wrong, but I respectfully ask to take this discussion off
this list to emacs-tangents, since this kind of semi-philosophical
argument is not really on-topic here, and certainly doesn't belong to
the current thread.