Re: [PATCH] Flymake support for C/C++

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Reuben Thomas <address@hidden>
> Date: Sat, 14 Oct 2017 08:10:44 +0100
> Cc: João Távora <address@hidden>, 
>       Sami Kerola <address@hidden>, address@hidden, Alan Mackenzie 
> <address@hidden>, 
>       Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden>, Noam Postavsky <address@hidden>, 
> address@hidden, 
>       Stefan Monnier <address@hidden>
> 
> These days, it seems much better to use Flycheck than Flymake (that's 
> certainly what I do). See
> https://github.com/flycheck/flycheck
> 
> It would be a pity for Flymake to become yet another part of Emacs that 
> developers spend time updating and
> users largely ignore; better to spin it off into ELPA, and if people still 
> want to work on it there, fine. Meanwhile,
> why not use Flycheck by default (in the same way as we've "in-sourced" Org 
> and other packages)?

I don't understand: Flycheck is an external package; why should we
prefer it to Flymake, assuming that the latter will become supported
well by the built-in major modes?

IOW, what I see here is a serious effort to make Flymake a
sophisticated and flexible syntax-checking tool bundled with Emacs.  I
don't see why should we object to such an effort, when one of our
major goals is to provide a modern program development environment.
If this effort is successful, I presume that users will not ignore
Flymake.