GNU bug report logs - #65344
28.2; Unable to Edebug cl-flet form which uses argument destructuring

Previous Next

Package: emacs;

Reported by: Brandon Irizarry <brandon.irizarry <at> gmail.com>

Date: Wed, 16 Aug 2023 18:23:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Found in version 28.2

Fixed in version 30.1

Done: Gerd Möllmann <gerd.moellmann <at> gmail.com>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Gerd Möllmann <gerd.moellmann <at> gmail.com>
To: Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen <at> web.de>
Cc: brandon.irizarry <at> gmail.com, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, 65344 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#65344: 28.2; Unable to Edebug cl-flet form which uses argument destructuring
Date: Tue, 22 Aug 2023 07:48:57 +0200

Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen <at> web.de> writes:

> Your patch breaks this case because it changed the order in the &or:
>
> #+begin_src emacs-lisp
> (defun make-fun (n)
>   (lambda () n))
>
> (defvar k 17)
>
> (cl-flet ((a (make-fun k))) ;; `make-fun' call not instrumented
>   (a))
> #+end_src

I wonder if this isn't a bug in cl-flet itself.  If you change the names
a bit, this is 

(cl-flet ((fn (a b)))
  ...)

which is a perfectly valid local definition of FN with two parameter A
and B, returning nil in CL.  It signals an error in Emacs which I'd
consider a bug.

> Did changing the order improve anything at all?

It's more beautiful :-).

> Second question: you are sure that the
> ";Allow (setf ...) additionally to symbols." thing was not something
> Stefan wanted to keep intentionally?  Just wondering.

What makes you think so?

> This spec was
> never being used, right?

Right.  One cannot define functions with non-symbol function names, and
never could.
This bug report was last modified 1 year and 261 days ago.

Previous Next

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