Subject: Re: 28.0.50; A problem with rx-let expansion

From: Michael Heerdegen <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 23 Aug 2021 12:45:41 +0200

Mattias Engdegård <[email-masked]> writes:

> Or just put all the actual code in a plain function:
>
> (eval-when-compile
>  (defun expand-my-rx-thing (x y &optional z &rest r) ...))
>
> (rx-define my-rx-thing (x y &rest more) (eval (expand-my-rx-thing x y
> more)))
>
> and use &optional and &rest arguments as you are used to, without any
> risks of substitution accidents like "string" in the example you
> showed earlier. The function would effectively work exactly like a
> macro of the sort you requested.

A good idea, I like it!

> > [... talking about docstring tweaks ...]
>
> I'll see what can be done. It's not really Emacs tradition to have
> examples in doc strings but maybe they can be improved a bit as you
> say.

I you find a way to get along without examples, all the better.  I
suggested to use an example because it might be the simplest way to
explain how things work, and because the way things work may come
unexpected for some (like me).  But providing some more details more
explicitly might be as good as well.

Regards,

Michael.