Xref: utzoo gnu.emacs.help:113 comp.emacs:9359 Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!tut.cis.ohio-state.edu!scenic.wa.com!pauld From: pauld@scenic.wa.com (Paul Barton-Davis) Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help,comp.emacs Subject: mail aliases Message-ID: <9010231620.AA08929@scenic.scenic.wa.com> Date: 23 Oct 90 16:20:44 GMT References: <9010221923.AA22429@kolyma> Sender: daemon@tut.cis.ohio-state.edu Followup-To: gnu.emacs.help Distribution: gnu Organization: GNUs Not Usenet Lines: 35 Jamie - my "flame" was not intended to be a *personal* attack. I entirely appreciate that 1: It is not uncommon to invest a nontrivial amount of time in a program that will save a user a small amount of time / need for attention to detail. having done so myself. However, it was intended to note the creeping featurism that elisp code is tending to promote. You posting was just the most blatant example of this that I've seen in a while. 3: I do not consider compatibility with existing tools which are BAD tools to necessarily be a desirable thing, especially when such compatibility would damage the functionality of the new tool. I would dispute that the .*rc file is a BAD tool. Abbrevs weren't meant to replace them, and using them that way is adding to the confusion about "what does program X do when it starts up ?" The reason *why* rc files are a GOOD tool is that they focus the answer to this question on one location, instead of forcing people to ask questions like "well, did you send it from within Emacs or did you use mail(x) ?". 4: I doubt gnu-emacs-announce is the right place for you to have CCed your flame. You're probably right, and it looks like my .mailrc needs checking since I didn't send it there :-) Paul Barton-Davis ScenicSoft, Inc. (206) 776-7760 "Industry without art is brutality"