[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Meaning of "Changed Definitions" in release 8

    Date: Thu, 30 Aug 90 17:00 EDT
    From: RWK@FUJI.ILA.COM (Robert W. Kerns)

	Date: Mon 27 Aug 90 15:54:17-CDT
	From: HI.COHEN@mcc.com (Rich Cohen)

	Release 8.0 introduced a change in the default behavior of M-X List
	Changed Definitions of Buffer and friends

    Ugh!  This seems to me to be both gratuitous incompatibility,
    and an outright disimprovement.  I don't see any reason to
    assume that saving my buffer to avoid losing my work has any
    correlation with which in a long series of changes needs to
    go into a patch.

    When this was decided on, what did people think the status of
    the functions modified but never patched should be?  Unpatched
    changes waiting to bite the next person to do a recompilation
    of the system?

    For me, the default behaviour maps to DO NOTHING.  I have always
    subscribed to the model:  EDIT-COMPILE-SAVE-TEST-PATCH.  Moving
    SAVE to the end gratiutously adds risk of forgetting to save your
    work, or losing it when your test screws up your machine.

    It's my opinion that this change was ill-considered.

I agree.  I don't see how this new behavior can benefit anyone.  And
what's worse, there's no way to revert to the "old" behavior aside from
hacking the code.