GNU bug report logs -
#17623
24.4.50; incorrect example for `apply-partially' in (elisp) `Calling Functions'
Previous Next
Reported by: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
Date: Wed, 28 May 2014 23:55:01 UTC
Severity: minor
Found in version 24.4.50
Done: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.
Full log
Message #49 received at 17623-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
> From: Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen <at> web.de>
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, 17623-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Sat, 23 Oct 2021 11:44:21 +0200
>
> I disagree. The paragraph in the manual explains what the arity of the
> function returned by `apply-partially' would be.
>
> Directly following is an example suggesting that (apply-partially '+ 1)
> is equivalent to #'1+ - which obviously contradicts that preceding
> paragraph.
In what sense is that a contradiction? (+ 1 10) is equivalent to (1+ 10),
so we have N = 2 arguments in the original function and M = 1 = N - 1 in
the new one.
> I'm a bit confused that you don't consider this a problem, and also that
> you said there were no concrete suggestions.
That suggestion doesn't make the documentation more clear, IMNSHO,
unless the reader already knows about apply-partially and generally
has a lot of background knowledge about Lisp and Emacs Lisp. Why are
you saying the suggestion is not being considered, whereas in reality
it was considered (and rejected)?
> There were concrete suggestions for improvements. One was to simply
> spell out the function that is constructed. It is only one line, and
> would make the semantics clear.
I cannot disagree more. That one line doesn't make anything clear, it
just shows the implementation.
> BTW, whenever I posted an example using `apply-partially', Stefan told
> me that it would be more efficient to write out the lambda. That aspect
> could also be covered: when is worth using?
Concrete proposals for expanding the documentation of apply-partially
(read: patches) will be most welcome, of course.
> Or delete that paragraph, better to say nothing than to confuse readers.
I object to deleting that. That text certainly helps me, so it cannot
be useless, let alone harmful.
This bug report was last modified 3 years and 262 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.