Subject: Re: bug#34708: alist-get has unclear documentation

From: Michael Heerdegen <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2019 18:45:40 +0100

Drew Adams <[email-masked]> writes:

> Why have REMOVE instead of just letting users
> set the value (explicitly) to DEFAULT?

That's the default behavior without using REMOVE.  Removing associations
is also a valid use case and in my eyes still consistent with the place
semantics.

> That would really follow "the expected semantics of setf", with
> nothing funny going on, no confusion.
>
> `alist-get' is a function, not just a gv place.  Argument REMOVE makes
> no sense for the function (does it?).  All the other args do make
> sense for the function.  Shouldn't all of the args to a function make
> sense for it?  Should we add args that are only used by `setf'?  Has
> that been done before?

Ok, REMOVE is more or less your only criticism.  I too find it a bit
odd, especially the additional argument, but not too odd and useful
enough to keep it.  It's very debatable, agreed.

Michael.