GNU bug report logs - #47677
[PATCH] condition-case success continuation

Previous Next

Full log

Message #96 received at 47677-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Mattias Engdegård <mattiase <at> acm.org>
To: Filipp Gunbin <fgunbin <at> fastmail.fm>
Cc: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>, Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>,
 Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>, 47677-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#47677: [PATCH] condition-case success continuation
Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 17:31:31 +0200

26 apr. 2021 kl. 17.12 skrev Filipp Gunbin <fgunbin <at> fastmail.fm>:

> Please, let's not add such features to the basic Emacs Lisp constructs.
> It's great to see Emacs Lisp being simple.

I'd like to clear up some misconceptions here. (Filipp, this does not mean that I think that you wrote something stupid -- quite the contrary.) 

First, is Emacs Lisp really simple? Yes and no. It's not easy to tell where its boundaries are, especially since it doesn't have a proper module or namespace system or a well-defined 'core language'. Basic semantics -- control structures, built-in types, primitives and so on -- are not too messy but definitely more than they need to be; Scheme it is not. No wonder given its age; it has held up remarkably well considering, but it would be even more remarkable if modern eyes could not find flaws in it.

Second, is simplicity paramount among concerns? Clearly not: compatibility matters, and so does programming usability. It is also not clear whether a change makes a language more or less simple; adding bignums, for example, probably made the language less complex for the user. Even if (hypothetically) people got by without `unwind-protect` by catching and re-raising errors, few would object to adding that construct as a special form because it made the language less simple.

Of course you were talking about changes that make the language more difficult to use, but my point is that it is far from clear what kind of change actually does that.

Unrelated to your comment: since several people have misunderstood the proposal, I'm closing the bug to avoid conflating issues (I should have listened to Stefan Kangas); a new one can be reopened for the patch at hand when and if I get more free time.

Previous Next

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