Subject: bug#40671: [DOC] modify literal objects

From: Paul Eggert <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 3 May 2020 13:48:14 -0700

On 5/3/20 9:44 AM, Dmitry Gutov wrote:
> On 03.05.2020 10:40, Paul Eggert wrote:
>> It's simpler just to say: programs shouldn't modify these objects.
> 
> Which objects, then?

Objects that the documentation currently calls "constants". (If there's a better
term than "constants" we haven't found it yet.)

>> They're not the only thing to cover, and attempting to shoehorn this all into
>> self-evaluating forms could even be misleading.
> 
> Which section would that go into? "Constants and Mutability" doesn't work.

If we change the word "constants" to something else, we would presumably retitle
the section and adjust its contents accordingly. Regardless of which word is
chosen we should document the issue, which is broader than that of constants
from self-evaluating forms.