From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Sep 18 13:46:46 2016 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Sep 2016 17:46:46 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34513 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1blgAv-0004Iy-Uf for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 13:46:46 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:35785) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1blc9p-0004tt-Hw for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 09:29:21 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1blc9j-0007B8-Ed for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 09:29:16 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: * X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,FREEMAIL_FROM, HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM,T_DKIM_INVALID autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::11]:39111) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1blc9j-0007Ag-BY for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 09:29:15 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54983) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1blc9h-0001gM-6J for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 09:29:14 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1blc9d-00078k-46 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 09:29:12 -0400 Received: from mail-wm0-f41.google.com ([74.125.82.41]:36055) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1blc9c-00077v-UO for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 09:29:09 -0400 Received: by mail-wm0-f41.google.com with SMTP id w84so34846909wmg.1 for ; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 06:29:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=RJvzBzbb76+ots7M/pzFZQKfy4fHpYSV0UbsxKeEabc=; b=SAdVYAsniMlsjWLBPJ6vsp7YLHhpGyc9aBt1yZW+qnHQ2PkRxYD5WRkideYuIjtKUZ zts286ap2D99bWgI58rT5rs5X0dnKImzEygNRzWNeK04daknQD1xowbqlsQwuB1NNWIH 8Xnn2+I03RvsmNEFUl6FgYX8+Rox1p6tUMasssO1nd/oQL9yvbnsrtYP1YXvCiQFM1NY DJiSXa4sOxQRcukLsMYWMDxGP00Kr/OB3CgnxnuNYHegNw5I+rYEKEi2wZL9zkeDS+7y uB35yWcoxzTSx7SHZztLx8OELGZTy7drg6JZvbPRVKR/gF5Yzx0Q/fD/8rrIXv2sDm8U M9CQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:from:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=RJvzBzbb76+ots7M/pzFZQKfy4fHpYSV0UbsxKeEabc=; b=NJI+vmWoO8B/9UxALo2CQOmYkWABR74gcPq62t+leF21qY0vRaUXOQ3GYSF1yk8r3y 4SEzePpOtOf4ySi7KhVYlMLddVQ5WA3rpkpwyBd5X0EbfvQKXMZPmtCOFLkISviK0Ug1 x6reL//99W0Jm5aQsCLzJ3zQ7pR2heOmKCXHHC3sBhtZ+4YSYDk6itrkBozogLHQCtvH yhPVN//zn+JU3psjv0ymyVWXbpVIgw1U5h5V4xqEjWtMI2zXLsVtlDE5se3EFwjCTZZr Tkq4U1IM6WdK7CoFNzOlAUOfjQI/ystNUbBijahHznss5U3r444ikDBBxHi9+30sQie4 wyMg== X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwPCeWCNlb3COPxdG+fDu4Aw4F4+ACfOKgLYWiTAWKG3zeVtwDJhwT+tt4Xb4UFkaD0myh3sWCWm/0klgw== X-Received: by 10.28.94.18 with SMTP id s18mr6024817wmb.44.1474205286418; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 06:28:06 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.28.13.138 with HTTP; Sun, 18 Sep 2016 06:27:45 -0700 (PDT) From: =?UTF-8?Q?Carlos_Garc=C3=ADa?= Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 15:27:45 +0200 Message-ID: Subject: 24.5; cl-flet and cl-labels are not properly documented To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11468e086c5868053cc82a27 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::11 X-Spam-Score: -3.5 (---) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 18 Sep 2016 13:46:44 -0400 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.5 (---) --001a11468e086c5868053cc82a27 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Dear Maintainer, I'd like to report a lack of documentation explaining the functions cl-flet and cl-labels. The documentation does not specify how all arguments are used and the exact purpose of the functions. Regards, Carlos --001a11468e086c5868053cc82a27 Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
=C2=A0Dear Maintainer,

=C2=A0I'd like to report= a lack of documentation explaining the functions
=C2=A0cl-flet and cl-l= abels. The documentation does not specify how all
=C2=A0arguments are us= ed and the exact purpose of the functions.


=C2=A0Regards,
=C2= =A0Carlos
--001a11468e086c5868053cc82a27-- From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Sep 19 22:32:40 2016 Received: (at 24459) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Sep 2016 02:32:40 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57704 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bmArP-0006iX-Pk for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 19 Sep 2016 22:32:40 -0400 Received: from mail.workgrouplinux.net ([207.195.177.82]:42865) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bmArO-0006iM-2A for 24459@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 19 Sep 2016 22:32:38 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=simple; d=cochranmail.com; h=from:to :cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=dkim1; bh=i/4CwpVWePO Ej9W1FYIN59cBu7o=; b=su4g9kJjZyUcseLeq4iU6uCnl8/3aUmCEyP3kF625Bz sjBxtGKnjni+86cOd5kFc90CbuiZqPM9ktGQ2S4UMZAR8+nEOAGQdiWmoUTUUTD8 DOyVzsnQu0z+QJfokXiFQKf9Vyjks3lN9JpDKMkld/FTBoNH7k0Qw8rpaKlkF5M/ PT1acfWkHpHN5itp92y6EtTrp15rewcfHJ10DIKSFdsk7B5qNq0ohaJAkCHy3s37 mOvlSGBz6zuuYQPXvsp+CDM0pI/4MaA1cyymuAyvW/jZyfmqR1es16i7Rws1JVUY g8vNzHCzAyOkVz7tpDXYe2kdXWhtBPbvHzFpkFQtnTQ== Received: (qmail 30477 invoked by uid 0); 20 Sep 2016 02:32:34 -0000 Comment: DomainKeys? See http://antispam.yahoo.com/domainkeys DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=private; d=cochranmail.com; b=KAbtj6n9CHAhXHf8cZ6CXzoM4KiSx/osL9Dq/XQ+cQQhIItVutQYX6oENLYtHRzZON7bq4JgLV1NM/clx/1Q6Q==; Received: from 131-191-86-130.as.clicknet.org (HELO SoraLaptop) (robert@cochranmail.com@131.191.86.130) by mail.cochrantribe.org with ESMTPA; 20 Sep 2016 02:32:34 -0000 From: Robert Cochran To: Carlos =?utf-8?Q?Garc=C3=ADa?= Subject: Re: bug#24459: 24.5; cl-flet and cl-labels are not properly documented References: Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 19:32:29 -0700 In-Reply-To: ("Carlos \=\?utf-8\?Q\?Garc\=C3\=ADa\=22's\?\= message of "Sun, 18 Sep 2016 15:27:45 +0200") Message-ID: <87wpi7s3lu.fsf@cochranmail.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 24459 Cc: 24459@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) Carlos Garc=C3=ADa writes: > Dear Maintainer, > > I'd like to report a lack of documentation explaining the functions > cl-flet and cl-labels. The documentation does not specify how all > arguments are used and the exact purpose of the functions. > > Regards, > Carlos > Here is the docstring for `cl-flet` (from my fairly recent git version): cl-flet is an autoloaded Lisp macro in =E2=80=98cl-macs.el=E2=80=99. (cl-flet ((FUNC ARGLIST BODY...) ...) FORM...) Make local function definitions. Like =E2=80=98cl-labels=E2=80=99 but the definitions are not recursive. Each binding can take the form (FUNC EXP) where FUNC is the function name, and EXP is an expression that returns the function value to which it should be bound, or it can take the more common form (FUNC ARGLIST BODY...) which is a shorthand for (FUNC (lambda ARGLIST BODY)). I think that sounds pretty complete to me. I'll admit, I'm biased because I know what flet is supposed to do, but there's nothing noticably missing from that description. Here is the docstring for `cl-labels` (from this same version): cl-labels is an autoloaded Lisp macro in =E2=80=98cl-macs.el=E2=80=99. (cl-labels ((FUNC ARGLIST BODY...) ...) FORM...) Make temporary function bindings. The bindings can be recursive and the scoping is lexical, but capturing t= hem in closures will only work if =E2=80=98lexical-binding=E2=80=99 is in use. The only thing I've got to say about this is that it may be a good idea to point back to `cl-flet` from the `cl-labels` docstring, because the `cl-flet` docstring is more complete. I suppose you could also argue that `func` could be changed to ensure that it's clear it's supposed to be a name. Again, I know that is what it's supposed to be, but that may not be clear to readers that don't already know. As for use cases, well, I don't think that *any* docstring explicitly spells out the 'exact purpose' of the function, but I'll go ahead and give a couple examples for you: 1. Reducing global namespace polution from helper functions ; sum is supposed to take the single argument and sum all numbers below it ; ie 5 -> (+ 1 2 3 4 5) -> 15 (defun sum-1 (arg acc) (if (zerop arg) acc (sum-1 (1- arg) (+ acc arg)))) (defun sum (arg) (sum-1 arg 0)) vs (defun sum (arg) (cl-labels (sum-1 (arg acc) (if (zerop arg) acc (sum-1 (1- arg) (+ acc arg)))) (sum-1 arg 0))) Notice how this example uses `cl-labels` because it is a recursive definition. 2. Creating helper functions that use function-internal values (defun get-value (data-structure key) (cdr (assoc key data-structure))) (defun compute-foo () (let* ((data-structure (create-data-structure)) (bar-value (get-value data-structure 'bar))) ; blah blah blah )) vs (defun compute-foo () (let ((data-structure (create-data-structure))) (cl-flet (get-value (key) (assoc key data-structure)) (let ((bar-value (get-value 'bar))) ; blah blah blah )))) Notice how in the second version of `compute-foo`, `get-value` is able to directly use `data-structure` instead of having to pass that in as an argument. I used `cl-flet` because the function definition wasn't recursive, so I didn't need `cl-labels`. The one other big thing to use these functions for is when a lambda for a higher-order function gets long enough that its stylistically a bad idea to write it inline, but you don't want to declare it globally, like in the first example. Anyways, tl;dr: The docstrings are pretty good as they are IMO, but I am speaking as one who is familiar with what they are supposed to do. My only nit is that it is a probably a good idea to have the docstring of `cl-labels` point back to `cl-flet`, just as `cl-flet` points to `cl-labels`. HTH, --=20 ~Robert Cochran GPG Fingerprint - E778 2DD4 FEA6 6A68 6F26 AD2D E5C3 EB36 4886 8871 From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Sep 19 22:42:30 2016 Received: (at 24459) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Sep 2016 02:42:30 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57714 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bmB0w-0006y6-2O for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 19 Sep 2016 22:42:30 -0400 Received: from mail-it0-f54.google.com ([209.85.214.54]:37094) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bmB0u-0006xu-42 for 24459@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 19 Sep 2016 22:42:28 -0400 Received: by mail-it0-f54.google.com with SMTP id 186so6630891itf.0 for <24459@debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 19 Sep 2016 19:42:28 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=c+SdUDSclhp5Uuyu8AAF7DjqZD4mhGMFqbH/IyrZHjc=; b=JQPb8/DltAW9v0x14P/P7U4W/hP5R1zU9rruLf4rAenhqwjoj91n3pgN5SYO061UnC KVWpUMVglOTMro67wjKMKsE0jSMYZpwCnNa5iWDskQ6lpfCyMYnXmzE9tK8kq+Xcej6f fsi+mNBlvNCw6tfJcNFERu21Tt+r8ere4N5+TiYiZuFeojd9XlEtHQcdp31FTD3soBVu 9a/CvYxOgUBcEAAM/2ketZnBy4zF9aDv+uXFqJFYXRzAzEeqY1oYnltQ/jQdSsWTVafI yRVFSbo0nepJkl6WMqTv1OFtkTQsDv6aDTKDILozrig2n/AIksl3FPu7/LQu6hvNP3dY oU9w== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=c+SdUDSclhp5Uuyu8AAF7DjqZD4mhGMFqbH/IyrZHjc=; b=DzpX7EZL8Wel8RNWhNNqLstwbktpvDK2MQ9JJ/nKBIa4hGvch4RLZAU7gALGMTKJcU ajHCvmQM3nsROapHgZTwtmPulFVWLKLziYIXKsX6hPo6S2xtv05BNEtzBn5R9rMiU1jq NSlxPVnU8L88581EC6zVAFRlrAwo6guz4F0WvrKoEsYojoIS0LhIX9zkHqp11HEj2bXC nWWZs8YLFKrwoYhvFNPdDYnXI5H7zPDtWfZpNSKN9W6IcFULYPFXqSExai/p+fHH/FGS 8WD7bKDINJdzlM74Er4iFf1ZNEEDidDjv1VGJYSR0uVgq89ezs5JLqHum5oNOJ37mBTZ jn1A== X-Gm-Message-State: AE9vXwOWdHKrEAcFj3+daZ3RlmApMN6zJ0/SCCYiVRNdDa0JGep3lVG0Hmz8MfYOHNNwkQ== X-Received: by 10.36.34.204 with SMTP id o195mr1479146ito.29.1474339342424; Mon, 19 Sep 2016 19:42:22 -0700 (PDT) Received: from zony ([45.2.7.130]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id z125sm12061294itc.0.2016.09.19.19.42.21 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Mon, 19 Sep 2016 19:42:21 -0700 (PDT) From: npostavs@users.sourceforge.net To: Robert Cochran Subject: Re: bug#24459: 24.5; cl-flet and cl-labels are not properly documented References: <87wpi7s3lu.fsf@cochranmail.com> Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 22:42:47 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87wpi7s3lu.fsf@cochranmail.com> (Robert Cochran's message of "Mon, 19 Sep 2016 19:32:29 -0700") Message-ID: <87bmzjz3yw.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -0.2 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 24459 Cc: 24459@debbugs.gnu.org, Carlos =?utf-8?Q?Garc=C3=ADa?= X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.2 (/) Robert Cochran writes: > > As for use cases, well, I don't think that *any* docstring explicitly > spells out the 'exact purpose' of the function Docstrings indeed shouldn't be too verbose, but it may be worth linking to the CL manual which has some more details on these macros. (cl) Function Bindings, https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/cl/Function-Bindings.html From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Sep 21 08:11:43 2016 Received: (at 24459) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Sep 2016 12:11:43 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58871 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bmgNL-0004LV-33 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 21 Sep 2016 08:11:43 -0400 Received: from [219.88.242.62] (port=50374 helo=mail.orcon.net.nz) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bmgNI-0004LL-Tj for 24459@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 21 Sep 2016 08:11:41 -0400 Received: from [192.168.20.100] ([150.107.172.8]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail.orcon.net.nz (8.14.3/8.14.3/Debian-9.4) with ESMTP id u8LCBTRh018154; Thu, 22 Sep 2016 00:11:30 +1200 Subject: Re: bug#24459: 24.5; cl-flet and cl-labels are not properly documented To: npostavs@users.sourceforge.net, Robert Cochran References: <87wpi7s3lu.fsf@cochranmail.com> <87bmzjz3yw.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> From: Phil Sainty Message-ID: <3f1aa880-f9f7-a73e-2cdc-07b4a1a868a9@orcon.net.nz> Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 00:11:29 +1200 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.2.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <87bmzjz3yw.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Bayes-Prob: 0.0001 (Score 0: No Bayes scoring rules defined, tokens from: outbound) X-Spam-Score: -1.73 () [Hold at 3.00] FREEMAIL_FROM:0.001, RDNS_NONE:1.274, CC(NZ:-3) X-CanIt-Geo: ip=150.107.172.8; country=NZ; latitude=-41.0000; longitude=174.0000; http://maps.google.com/maps?q=-41.0000,174.0000&z=6 X-CanItPRO-Stream: base:outbound X-Canit-Stats-ID: 02RKcbu0X - 8fb4ca990f1a - 20160922 (trained as not-spam) X-Scanned-By: CanIt (www . roaringpenguin . com) X-Spam-Score: 1.8 (+) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On 20/09/16 14:42, > Docstrings indeed shouldn't be too verbose, but it may be worth linking > to the CL manual which has some more details on these macros. > > (cl) Function Bindings, > https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/cl/Function-Bindings.html [...] Content analysis details: (1.8 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.5 RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM RBL: SORBS: sender is a spam source [219.88.242.62 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (psainty[at]orcon.net.nz) 1.3 RDNS_NONE Delivered to internal network by a host with no rDNS X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 24459 Cc: 24459@debbugs.gnu.org, =?UTF-8?Q?Carlos_Garc=c3=ada?= X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 1.8 (+) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: On 20/09/16 14:42, > Docstrings indeed shouldn't be too verbose, but it may be worth linking > to the CL manual which has some more details on these macros. > > (cl) Function Bindings, > https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/cl/Function-Bindings.html [...] Content analysis details: (1.8 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.5 RCVD_IN_SORBS_SPAM RBL: SORBS: sender is a spam source [219.88.242.62 listed in dnsbl.sorbs.net] 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (psainty[at]orcon.net.nz) 1.3 RDNS_NONE Delivered to internal network by a host with no rDNS On 20/09/16 14:42, npostavs@users.sourceforge.net wrote: > Docstrings indeed shouldn't be too verbose, but it may be worth linking > to the CL manual which has some more details on these macros. > > (cl) Function Bindings, > https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/cl/Function-Bindings.html Strongly agreed; but that documentation should also include details on using cl-letf for dynamic-scope function binding, and the link to that info node should appear in the docstrings of all three macros. I also think the summary text at the top of the node should include something like "The practical difference between the following options is the scope of the bindings, and therefore which one you use will be determined by the scope you require." -Phil From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Oct 12 16:21:28 2019 Received: (at 24459) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Oct 2019 20:21:28 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34276 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iJNtH-0005Q6-Ti for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 12 Oct 2019 16:21:28 -0400 Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]:39226) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iJNtE-0005Ps-Dw for 24459@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 12 Oct 2019 16:21:25 -0400 Received: from cm-84.212.202.86.getinternet.no ([84.212.202.86] helo=marnie) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iJNt9-00080E-Tf; Sat, 12 Oct 2019 22:21:22 +0200 From: Lars Ingebrigtsen To: npostavs@users.sourceforge.net Subject: Re: bug#24459: 24.5; cl-flet and cl-labels are not properly documented References: <87wpi7s3lu.fsf@cochranmail.com> <87bmzjz3yw.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2019 22:21:19 +0200 In-Reply-To: <87bmzjz3yw.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> (npostavs@users.sourceforge.net's message of "Mon, 19 Sep 2016 22:42:47 -0400") Message-ID: <87imotk94w.fsf@gnus.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "quimby.gnus.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: npostavs@users.sourceforge.net writes: > Robert Cochran writes: > >> As for use cases, well, I don't think that *any* docstring explicitly >> spells out the 'exact purpose' of the function > > Docstrings inde [...] Content analysis details: (-2.9 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 24459 Cc: Carlos =?utf-8?Q?Garc=C3=ADa?= , Robert Cochran , 24459@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) npostavs@users.sourceforge.net writes: > Robert Cochran writes: > >> As for use cases, well, I don't think that *any* docstring explicitly >> spells out the 'exact purpose' of the function > > Docstrings indeed shouldn't be too verbose, but it may be worth linking > to the CL manual which has some more details on these macros. > > (cl) Function Bindings, > https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/cl/Function-Bindings.html I've now added one from the macro that didn't have one, and I don't think there more to be done here, so I'm closing the bug report. -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Oct 12 16:21:30 2019 Received: (at control) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Oct 2019 20:21:30 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34279 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iJNtK-0005QL-Ah for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 12 Oct 2019 16:21:30 -0400 Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]:39242) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iJNtI-0005QD-QI for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 12 Oct 2019 16:21:29 -0400 Received: from cm-84.212.202.86.getinternet.no ([84.212.202.86] helo=marnie) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iJNtG-00080N-59 for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 12 Oct 2019 22:21:28 +0200 Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2019 22:21:25 +0200 Message-Id: <87h84dk94q.fsf@gnus.org> To: control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Lars Ingebrigtsen Subject: control message for bug #24459 X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "quimby.gnus.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see @@CONTACT_ADDRESS@@ for details. Content preview: tags 24459 fixed close 24459 27.1 quit Content analysis details: (-2.9 points, 5.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- -1.0 ALL_TRUSTED Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP -1.9 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% [score: 0.0000] X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: control X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) tags 24459 fixed close 24459 27.1 quit From unknown Sun Jun 15 08:37:13 2025 Received: (at fakecontrol) by fakecontrolmessage; To: internal_control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Debbugs Internal Request Subject: Internal Control Message-Id: bug archived. Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2019 12:24:13 +0000 User-Agent: Fakemail v42.6.9 # This is a fake control message. # # The action: # bug archived. thanks # This fakemail brought to you by your local debbugs # administrator