GNU bug report logs - #56974
29.0.50; Missing documentation for former subr-x macros

Previous Next

Full log

Message #14 received at 56974 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>
To: Philip Kaludercic <philipk <at> posteo.net>
Cc: 56974 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Subject: Re: bug#56974: 29.0.50; Missing documentation for former subr-x macros
Date: Fri, 05 Aug 2022 14:01:53 +0200

Philip Kaludercic <philipk <at> posteo.net> writes:

> +During complex computations that might at any step, one can combine a

Missing a word or two here?

> +For the sake of backwards compatibility, it is possible to write a
> +single binding without a binding list:

I'm not sure we need to document this bit.

> +@defmac if-let* (bindings <at> dots) then &rest else
> +@code{if-let*} is mostly equivalent to @code{if-let}, with the
> +exception that the legacy @code{(if (@var{var} (test)) foo bar)}
> +syntax is not permitted.
> +@end defmac

So I think it's sufficient to document only the *-less variant.

Previous Next

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