Hacker News Reader

Comment by cratermoon | Hacker News Reader

You must have missed the part where this change does not include the ability to revert to the old behavior via any settings.

View on HN

As far as I can tell this is simply not true. I don't think the change is a good idea but the hard fork also looks like a pure political play, not a technical one.

Also, as soon as someone talks about "settings" there is usually a profound misunderstanding of how Emacs works at play.

No, they didn't. It's Emacs. Every thing is dynamically scoped lisp. It's like if you could include arbitrary javascript in your vscode config and if you shadow any core function any code calling it will now use your function instead.

How is that not a fork? You have to maintain your function. Upstream can change in ways that your monkey patched function won't work; you have to maintain that going forward.

If you want to share your change with others, you have to ask them: which version of VSCode are you on, and give them the correct monkey patch which worked with that version.

You're doing everything fork-like except calling it a fork.

It doesn't need to be a fork, you can have your own emacs config, everybody does. Are you familiar with emacs internals?

What morelisp said: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=38592976

You know what? I was wrong, you're right. I thought this was a change to the core engine, but I looked again and see it's in the lisp. The user's ~/.emacs file can override this setting, so no hard fork is needed.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com