GNU bug report logs - #24386
24.5; `read--expression' --> `read-expression', please

Previous Next

Full log

Message #21 received at 24386 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen <at> web.de>
Cc: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>, 24386 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: RE: bug#24386: 24.5; `read--expression' --> `read-expression', please
Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2019 17:34:58 -0700 (PDT)

> > > > Please consider renaming `read--expression' to `read-expression'
> and
> > > > taking away its "internal" designation.  What it does is equally
> > > > useful to ordinary Emacs user-programmers.
> > >
> > > It does seem like a rather internal function (setting up eldoc
> stuff
> > > and the like), so I think it's probably well-named as is; closing.
> >
> > There's _absolutely nothing_ internal about the
> > behavior this function offers.  You can use it
> > _any_ place where you want to read a sexp.
> 
> IMO we should offer an official way to read expression input.  That
> would likely look very much like read--expression.
> 
> > As for it using `eldoc-mode': That presumably makes the function more
> > useful for specifically Lisp-sexp reading.  If we think otherwise
> > then that could be removed or optional.
> 
> FWIW it wasn't there from the beginning - it was added while fixing
> Bug#27202.  If we speak of Lisp, the name "expression" implies
> something to be intended for evaluation, so having eldoc support
> is totally legitimate.
> 
> Why not also add a `read-sexp'?

+1 to all you said.

`read--expression' is a good beginning for such
a function.  If we don't do as you suggest then it
would also be a good end: just remove the extra `-'.

(But I don't think the name "expression" implies
something to be intended for evaluation.  It often
means that, but it's also used just for "sexp".)

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.