GNU bug report logs - #40671
[DOC] modify literal objects

Previous Next

Package: emacs;

Reported by: Kevin Vigouroux <ke.vigouroux <at> laposte.net>

Date: Thu, 16 Apr 2020 20:40:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Tags: patch

Done: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


View this message in rfc822 format

From: Drew Adams <drew.adams <at> oracle.com>
To: Paul Eggert <eggert <at> cs.ucla.edu>, Mattias EngdegÄrd <mattiase <at> acm.org>
Cc: Kevin Vigouroux <ke.vigouroux <at> laposte.net>, 40671 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#40671: [DOC] modify literal objects
Date: Sun, 19 Apr 2020 14:01:31 -0700 (PDT)
> distinguish between constant objects (which the
> program should not change) and mutable objects
> (which the program can change).

That's just not what "constant" means.  And I
suspect that your _uses_ of _not_ "mutable" will
still be for things that we really want to say
you probably _should not_ change, and not that
you _cannot_ change them.

You are once again confusing things for readers,
I think.

Something you probably _should not_ change is
not necessarily a constant.  (And the converse
isn't strong enough - you simply _cannot_ change
a constant.)

And places where you will likely say there's no
reason you _shouldn't_ change something will
likely give the impression that this is because
it is "mutable", and give the impression that
there's no reason you shouldn't change anything
that you _can_ change.  This can give the
impression  that if you _can_ change something
(the real meaning of "mutable") then there's no
reason you shouldn't change it.  That's the
wrong message.




This bug report was last modified 5 years and 3 days ago.

Previous Next


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