Subject: Re: bug#6835: 23.2; eval'ing `type-of' with #[abc] as arg gets a Fatal error (11) Segmentation fault

From: Stefan Monnier <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 11 Aug 2010 22:20:24 +0200

>> Yes and no.  Should (lambda 3) be accepted by functionp?  What about
>> (lambda () . 3) ?  What about (lambda () (+ . 1)) and other errors?

> I don't see why those examples should satisfy functionp.  The Elisp
> manual says:

Because (lambda () 1) is a valid function that can be passed to
`funcall'.

> I think your examples are merely cons objects that look like lambda
> expressions (a function subtype) but are not.

They're both cons objects and functions.

> But it is useful to know whether the error is signaled by funcall or
> by the function.

Why?

        Stefan