Juanma Barranquero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > However, supporting "(boundp 'emacs)" would make sense.
So, just _when_ would you use it? > I don't think we're in the business of telling outside elisp > developers whether they should consider Emacs or XEmacs the "main > line". You just said above that making the distinction only makes sense for packages maintained externally. > If a guy uses XEmacs and develops a package for it, and he's nice > enough to make allowances for it to work on Emacs, it's a bit absurd > to ask him to consider Emacs the main line and put XEmacs code > inside guards. Supporting the 'emacs feature is not a big deal, but > it is certainly nicer to non-Emacs developers (at least long term). I don't see that. I am afraid of people putting (boundp 'emacs) into code also for things that Emacs happens to have _now_, even though XEmacs might gain them in a later synch, or just putting (boundp 'emacs) habitually in without thinking anything about it. I really think that this is one change that we are better off without. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel
