GNU bug report logs - #31052
26.0.91; Improve documentation of inline-letevals

Previous Next

Full log

Message #26 received at 31052 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Gemini Lasswell <gazally <at> runbox.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 31052 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#31052: 26.0.91; Improve documentation of inline-letevals
Date: Fri, 06 Apr 2018 13:29:23 -0700

Eli Zaretskii writes:

>   When an element of @var{bindings} is just a symbol @var{var}, the
>   result of evaluating @var{var} is re-bound to @var{var}.
>
> Is this what caused you to say it "does a completely different thing
> to symbols in the binding list"?  Or did I misunderstand?
>

What caused me to say it does a completely different thing is that,
for example, if VAR is bound to 3 in an outside scope, inside:

(let (var) ...)

it will be bound to nil.  But inside

(inline-letevals (var) ...)

it will be bound to 3.  And if VAR is unbound in the outside scope,
let will bind it to nil and inline-letevals will signal an error.

It's occurred to me while writing this that

(inline-letevals (var) ...)

behaves much like

(let ((var (eval var))) ...)

although I'm not sure how to turn that into a concise explanation for
the documentation.

Previous Next

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