From unknown Sat Jun 14 03:48:17 2025 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.509 (Entity 5.509) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 From: bug#73853 <73853@debbugs.gnu.org> To: bug#73853 <73853@debbugs.gnu.org> Subject: Status: Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? Reply-To: bug#73853 <73853@debbugs.gnu.org> Date: Sat, 14 Jun 2025 10:48:17 +0000 retitle 73853 Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? reassign 73853 emacs submitter 73853 Stefan Monnier severity 73853 wishlist thanks From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Oct 17 12:30:34 2024 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Oct 2024 16:30:34 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35378 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t1TOT-0008TN-6h for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 17 Oct 2024 12:30:34 -0400 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:49904) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t1TOO-0008PM-VP for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 17 Oct 2024 12:30:31 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t1TLw-00069q-HE for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 17 Oct 2024 12:27:56 -0400 Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t1TLu-00010m-Bo for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 17 Oct 2024 12:27:56 -0400 Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 3DBA88091B for ; Thu, 17 Oct 2024 12:27:52 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1729182471; bh=J6o73kOS3i9W6xZ7B7EJohBF8Rim3NKjF2kGT7ts7Sk=; h=From:To:Subject:Date:From; b=DBsb4rRPKqcNxCO7bf8OcfyvoH2bowZ1/j6GGErSFVPFlX5PAnBJgpPQqBphdWI9x CLlQd/MawZKa4I7AOurl/eicjCFa3Pnu1v5VyANNtgy4Y+tpYE8Gije5jR3FwdGeg4 ah6nWQcEAcrxYOuyQgeT+xHaYqmMolBEaXI25NmuL8oyA0aPAoM5IOIviFDca4RVJN i1yBh9n64eV0U2alqJwyskxDhULTjtHleJsQYD3ZtJlqnTHm/TLdOjbryP0vPRpPsu lFjALGSomPhp0zyimlm3Zn0KnoFjCx7t22mc5PtOmci/dW/LLgcSSnt9KCSr0wEPwV RD98ejhqvK4Uw== Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 673008027D for ; Thu, 17 Oct 2024 12:27:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from alfajor (unknown [23.233.149.155]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 513DE120235 for ; Thu, 17 Oct 2024 12:27:51 -0400 (EDT) From: Stefan Monnier To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Subject: 31.0.50; and-let* is useless X-Debbugs-Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2024 12:27:39 -0400 Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-SPAM-INFO: Spam detection results: 0 ALL_TRUSTED -1 Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP AWL 0.056 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain DKIM_VALID_EF -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from domain X-SPAM-LEVEL: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: -1.3 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) Package: Emacs Version: 31.0.50 According to its docstring, `and-let*` does: Bind variables according to VARLIST and conditionally evaluate BODY. Like `when-let*', except if BODY is empty and all the bindings are non-nil, then the result is the value of the last binding. IOW the only time it's different from `when-let*` is when BODY is empty, i.e. its only "feature" compares to `when-let*` is that (and-let* (..BINDINGS.. (last (binding)))) is equivalent to (and-let* (..BINDINGS..) (binding)) Why would anyone write the first instead of the second, other than out of masochism? Can we kill/deprecate this? [ I think we have too many (if|when|and)-let(*) for our own good: we should pick some winners and deprecate the other ones. ] I could see a use for something called `and-let(*)` but without a BODY, for the purpose of remove a level of parens and indentation: (and-let* (x1 (foo1)) (x2 (foo2))) i.s.o (and-let* ((x1 (foo1)) (x2 (foo2)))) - Stefan From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Oct 17 12:40:37 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Oct 2024 16:40:37 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35399 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t1TYC-0000VA-LF for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 17 Oct 2024 12:40:37 -0400 Received: from mx0b-00069f02.pphosted.com ([205.220.177.32]:17010) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t1TY7-0000SW-Na for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 17 Oct 2024 12:40:33 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0246631.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-00069f02.pphosted.com (8.18.1.2/8.18.1.2) with ESMTP id 49HFBptB002249; Thu, 17 Oct 2024 16:40:09 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to; s= corp-2023-11-20; bh=F1F8dAE0qNV/lTXksttJDSlfca7SkKzBBmXgV5dpLnM=; b= Nb0ZqHw35bBe5wZtMdeKU9+3Oxu5CS3ED7E9ZmXr+Q4fxr38G6GxV0IFzPFzP8x9 LLMPbijhy8LTZoxoUFfOQhlAZ+seFXAAAIhcdGbFPzVX0M4TJvWrilZy9tordETI S7af6FipUnx1iWRxHp+w6TuRFupb16VgsVlVYdjmueY/f7N3YltmZK7k+H8VCewQ ssChw14ogW3gvFsih4cJi8A+6HkWSPD4yMfJaNsn6D6PPgXSTF5TPz8TF4eFZxBP F9xpSawPXmpjNWpRdjHdtSWtIwaSwydc95O9Vfxob4JdI/gZJVLzEoIA3aPRQzLO iebmpLfln4sUv2aFoF3gZw== Received: from iadpaimrmta03.imrmtpd1.prodappiadaev1.oraclevcn.com (iadpaimrmta03.appoci.oracle.com [130.35.103.27]) by mx0b-00069f02.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 427fw2q1m1-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 17 Oct 2024 16:40:09 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pps.filterd (iadpaimrmta03.imrmtpd1.prodappiadaev1.oraclevcn.com [127.0.0.1]) by iadpaimrmta03.imrmtpd1.prodappiadaev1.oraclevcn.com (8.18.1.2/8.18.1.2) with ESMTP id 49HG2Hrh011009; Thu, 17 Oct 2024 16:40:08 GMT Received: from nam10-bn7-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn7nam10lp2046.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.70.46]) by iadpaimrmta03.imrmtpd1.prodappiadaev1.oraclevcn.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 427fjgty9s-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 17 Oct 2024 16:40:08 +0000 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector10001; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=E5RSxl+ZFwKeaton5Sxpt6VbTK005tEVO90BLd2xh3bH0/MUCr5qDvkCNNQGnpTyTI+HRsIQV/d4ZA490De1f7lf9bufprdv3Fxhal+XdbvSlbSbDt9dUHS7e2Bgp27vztB0neDwYK9+VzQZWeBIDi+DnPwg63XU1496eTO2AlMewLg1Zdtd9KPtZB+SMhPzxyUgW4XfriWBj942G54v2An91Er7bu+JpTlwlKEMR19NcP5Q9w+YSeiX4BIxG7vdl9SNHLDGj0VYvaDfgFOQL7aTPIqSalYKAK41wm9o593+DvPdGj/ZreaeOHvIfG6/ZG5si2FEqzggnrUD/NWB0w== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector10001; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=F1F8dAE0qNV/lTXksttJDSlfca7SkKzBBmXgV5dpLnM=; b=qG8NIL9/kjGDrvq/h2ixRS+hs/RZkXtkfc7w64rKVe8AG5LelAVn8mxqibcr5EoFIC4/6XLjqzIceXbBr8lNI8rflix9BidsRnvvX24InmQBEsnCTG5q5hwf5gtWICvLWM/yKg9F5xTmg0FJ0znIW3tbXtBmHm48tu603OErGsNGBWHbEgmI0H3Y0yZ1lRGAA1XGbF8fC6aNgo6lxToMsY4qGC1qQM4vHa65mlY4p9+0XHL5Nw4cw59GmNB3UOWcODX9GCVdvRhGE/mKeAq2P12CatJeAq625gjVdLTp++iFbw/Tkj6dCoPxztfdR8XgUA0WJyw2ycictl1ZvX3TUQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=oracle.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=oracle.com; dkim=pass header.d=oracle.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-oracle-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=F1F8dAE0qNV/lTXksttJDSlfca7SkKzBBmXgV5dpLnM=; b=heqoSxDnpNoZ8qw/f7U/4N83sPBNSDeXaIWrPwWWab2miaYUdzZB6OQ7ljWZL86CzFH1qHc4l397EAxecYlWG8ksYEGfUUVEGw8NZdhrWgSSzGCq8kbdTYZrDqnnCGkTLLQLRkLxO0BG+W+7/dnhK6nEKxAoUcAf50vmYMpeNxY= Received: from BLAPR10MB5219.namprd10.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:321::22) by DM6PR10MB4379.namprd10.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:21e::15) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.8069.18; Thu, 17 Oct 2024 16:40:06 +0000 Received: from BLAPR10MB5219.namprd10.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::8179:21ba:b158:7d50]) by BLAPR10MB5219.namprd10.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::8179:21ba:b158:7d50%6]) with mapi id 15.20.8069.020; Thu, 17 Oct 2024 16:40:06 +0000 From: Drew Adams To: Stefan Monnier , "73853@debbugs.gnu.org" <73853@debbugs.gnu.org> Subject: RE: [External] : bug#73853: 31.0.50; and-let* is useless Thread-Topic: [External] : bug#73853: 31.0.50; and-let* is useless Thread-Index: AQHbILHyW+rj5ysU3EWLE38b0ximxbKLJLbw Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2024 16:40:06 +0000 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: BLAPR10MB5219:EE_|DM6PR10MB4379:EE_ x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 82331f32-e4d8-49d3-2b2c-08dceeca5b3d x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-ms-exchange-antispam-relay: 0 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; ARA:13230040|376014|366016|1800799024|38070700018; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: =?us-ascii?Q?IxFLkFoGDgRaaAAjo42/TvRIJvWa0UbWskcJVnvXQCVvdDwR5vENjo3S3iFP?= =?us-ascii?Q?NaiOOOTEDHyO/X64r8f26h4uUkiKrKgi3OkMNLroJghra7tCs+tAaQz1CgJZ?= =?us-ascii?Q?LtKHUwZve+Mb70thY8a8iTx8sZWEHmjKUNt2FrFoZborv44s8EmmAMaEq7qM?= =?us-ascii?Q?QCkrga36ejkxJ7ae4cc5V82Wm1bpmBB2GV5cilhIWiOzXBbxYSgmLwKON4oK?= =?us-ascii?Q?4gDMMNlcuUaeWeZ16E2zOrKQcXLEtJcShoTQ5Bm+dsTkkCwdtjuyc4n0TW1r?= =?us-ascii?Q?t2oVxHFm0Cn28iO83izkTv1NKSKTeYvboJ5PKvqi5VnhDAdTK6bSRftJ2IiY?= =?us-ascii?Q?zetplzYJjqq25q5rsKvMRtzixbH/DomYmLrmjVFok9SMZ/spBtoBJKW4zybt?= =?us-ascii?Q?CFdsD1Y56t8+TWom0oXA/sxzw52RJ0h2SmG0+osO219hLbJ9aFsmf2YdZFj1?= =?us-ascii?Q?jRBYoinCXeB4KcgOkJg3zC3dIUnaKM8iHtcTrJa6Va3bnH1iZAk2zoC53eo4?= =?us-ascii?Q?7xdblUKv5zJlCVQ1Pb/IzofXesDG/2qd2rwFstTHn1YByE8oTHYLuHGNU+1Q?= =?us-ascii?Q?YLPaBhfMpvNAjhgaz3dcIVSmfJUUpSYbDelg8sHLcONt+eXL2VX7wPIll7yw?= =?us-ascii?Q?ld28rSOM7hZETrGQhjwmbljKz1uOLC7q3vMCriAr5TQbSLg6c3HHgCwX6+lT?= =?us-ascii?Q?TwGKDTMEOvx5FQ52pCe9R3Iz61Lf4CG6B1caPhygzoPH06VZcRXwcEfoguoz?= =?us-ascii?Q?w7Ywu5YBeDD5VlDqZ0mof/YLMuEau0Xuny33HOpjUSQqnyQlZ0YeoPBaMI9t?= =?us-ascii?Q?EIZCyAwhMLMbAuiYJJ/omjLm7M9YX1UBAi+bC9PwuTpoIXsq3ajVPXI0jZyl?= =?us-ascii?Q?L/IHUTGGsYpXGXXiOltxgfXoCHVAJeRjazN2XCMklGN0hkTymOwOypZ08TIt?= =?us-ascii?Q?mjH5KOosTbuQMTZdL+WIZ4jsTRn+R5zUGU2TO4mEnFcfV1s7RrgSiTkAFYtF?= =?us-ascii?Q?1DsQRKokePQYdd/5uFqKXBKauk76bIL+88aCDIUcTim5vvEaQ2ZDSCF7YRy+?= =?us-ascii?Q?/yq5TNS9N3CZdhD1/lk4pb4tfaV+qEN5hrJhMVa0HklOTYv5bSJUnXwWpwDf?= =?us-ascii?Q?KYhLVPmEp9NV2PhqLz0hw9yGUAIU7hFfd8cB0EqpiiouMwvdEQjhfd9JEpct?= =?us-ascii?Q?0+F4HKZImPKwSg3tgAW2uaalEnXVfZ3hqvV9LnmThpakiqSloTAx9j2Nfnso?= =?us-ascii?Q?Pm5wiCI/eQtjwndDYF0ctfUI9EhjayCN6Ky15w7q5l3BivG+ed2ZUNhlBq39?= =?us-ascii?Q?lyJRoFknd8NZRPXOH7rt6x/sNJ4zdo0uOuMnYNjaZvcqZ93AxCdKPaBIweqQ?= =?us-ascii?Q?ow/ww/E=3D?= x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:BLAPR10MB5219.namprd10.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(13230040)(376014)(366016)(1800799024)(38070700018); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata-chunkcount: 1 x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata-0: =?us-ascii?Q?EdyLA19bMuqULERpQkTDS3LpLPEruwACdtFBiQHZEdsY3RpmpIoVWBpk3Jil?= =?us-ascii?Q?25BDMDDjp4oeso1Wja4Nta7zanAGEPDUE7VEu1nfSunSpMriSyvXx3P784O2?= =?us-ascii?Q?TDaS5xaZc2AK+xSiIYi4M28HL3CSPGJHPjZheZHJH4jUFy9V9zkQPIER+07V?= =?us-ascii?Q?xagQ15Lx7GfU4HvO0T4qx3I1JcIfMi18wJHRaNQtDL7KG907tjUAzzrb4Fqc?= =?us-ascii?Q?tL7or+rTuBdUZBsGsIlUzOW2Jc5uL8VvjEWCjHLQxVLphTPQ/BkJ7IXRl5pp?= =?us-ascii?Q?7jQSeXum3Hg9eiLAThEmUjoWI8PMbBKZbpJi24osLAZoSHfk0QN/4QoiAbKp?= =?us-ascii?Q?KsI+6BvXKL5EtbCPiP3dzGikinxa0WW7gqaXjiycZ/EDJesgJrOTTP/sKC5s?= =?us-ascii?Q?7n3RIC2yzaBDgpYlYWBdBBXOo0RAFd3vQyzM6GJ7zGPQo5jEgORyyLs7JXnL?= =?us-ascii?Q?6vy3bHv5aUF6H2xUE6xbJcVNc+AjF28mt3YA5r0JAU2LlYVz8t26K3kZqtfA?= =?us-ascii?Q?APscKTCgiudIJubWHrKfP7J/QGTlqEZtZLyq0CCGUDB82EfXOlUrevnm/N8r?= =?us-ascii?Q?XibOA3l9B1MsnbHBpzm9RDPXLCeLCFjVRLuwHXXrf4RVWLxzJ5XaLsu+MzPy?= =?us-ascii?Q?8vmCO3PbumMdO9Qwv7/z3FG37JWZ0x0J/HLyHg2BGd6yCYsDw4DLcGhNwQ1r?= =?us-ascii?Q?xCzLDV4ukNud+7NeWUSTdvwTUKW8Y+yBNLFCQoIIYuv6sAlW3/2yW9y8rLCG?= =?us-ascii?Q?khfF9BJME7du8cA7TN1za3kxLJg9adAwmTiI/TL1FKfCPpfuzyIk3W5W8qiP?= =?us-ascii?Q?ZltzwtGI072FQUIpQnI0bgPl0dAqN+5IY94D8/DpJpq2nXs2rLyzFMxvZY+e?= =?us-ascii?Q?VZEyiTpruB01DZz52bCZISJ+LrYP4cMdKYSgaYhIVQpddB4dhvjK3+4CDlCz?= =?us-ascii?Q?Yhd5uWTbGgyGaBHLrafEJ9J1/NFtmWwKu5bSBci+YPbArIPW6TkgT/Vk+T1f?= =?us-ascii?Q?k37hkpnLCxSDqdNRSukNknyFfPw4qxDrO/1C6iryPsF+nDu/gBFMs6do4eSu?= =?us-ascii?Q?tpnXES5tXo2WaIa+/WR7Z27mwF74NkxqqUiWf2iy8K/zw5woIT1yILaPLxcI?= =?us-ascii?Q?r86TGM2v2qisMMrjyoRH9xHiJ/V2FIw8XdSaV4lUnQT5V6b4kAxUaf0MIi4a?= =?us-ascii?Q?5DRg9LGZVOpvexNsaiQgQjc/cu8LqqaCeIuVE2I00WzJN1JVhR5rhD+AdrbL?= =?us-ascii?Q?Ld/bmY8wUSx3f4p2ajJrLYrkbHrmFN3UqYjQSi9Sf6HcAGXKG2RJHmoYYQAL?= =?us-ascii?Q?Xogdwj8iD6i85EtMVnlj5/6GvTWbhI00Z8HgDY3kGK6W6KhaB+uUNjAGc+42?= =?us-ascii?Q?kG34IxEl7RR8qBXh0PMFE0rhn6Ovj/Fy7a8rARw/+/j/CLg3dobxdyzesrbY?= =?us-ascii?Q?kLRSjIk9lRIMjzLLj/SOb5ZasjDu8DLq2Lh/WfZzKy1sqpld3aq7cZmwm5ZC?= =?us-ascii?Q?dhG4ihr08W1Bt6wK39x/Euv8AW1eno/HdZoLpZza6SpZtw22pISSQLt281F5?= =?us-ascii?Q?epkD1yHsVZDD+trzyHXM0I2JPG/ipcsEoLSpms1m?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-ExternalHop-MessageData-ChunkCount: 1 X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-ExternalHop-MessageData-0: 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 X-OriginatorOrg: oracle.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: BLAPR10MB5219.namprd10.prod.outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 82331f32-e4d8-49d3-2b2c-08dceeca5b3d X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 17 Oct 2024 16:40:06.1160 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 4e2c6054-71cb-48f1-bd6c-3a9705aca71b X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: UJkaUt+RrzELEEbv+5i3n76BB45Aa1UIHfIoiu8il0x1IC/Wg2zMl4BiJoeYe7b1cPFFGXw7kO3cpklOw/jbiw== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: DM6PR10MB4379 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1051,Hydra:6.0.680,FMLib:17.12.62.30 definitions=2024-10-17_18,2024-10-17_01,2024-09-30_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 phishscore=0 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 suspectscore=0 bulkscore=0 mlxlogscore=637 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2409260000 definitions=main-2410170113 X-Proofpoint-GUID: hbHznXpwVikgu72l0oMTkrEYO3qHMqhb X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: hbHznXpwVikgu72l0oMTkrEYO3qHMqhb X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) > [ I think we have too many (if|when|and)-let(*) for our own good: we > should pick some winners and deprecate the other ones. ] +1. (Are there really any winners? ;-)) From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Oct 17 22:11:16 2024 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Oct 2024 02:11:16 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36488 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t1cSR-0001oW-NM for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 17 Oct 2024 22:11:16 -0400 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:46128) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t1cSP-0001oM-BP for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 17 Oct 2024 22:11:14 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t1cS2-0006uD-Rd for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 17 Oct 2024 22:10:50 -0400 Received: from mout.web.de ([217.72.192.78]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t1cS0-0003rI-It for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 17 Oct 2024 22:10:50 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=web.de; s=s29768273; t=1729217433; x=1729822233; i=michael_heerdegen@web.de; bh=qvjaFFPKocpr1ubNb88x4si3Rz5nHOcAlNyDzscnPfM=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date: Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:cc:content-transfer-encoding: content-type:date:from:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject: to; b=FvnnUM4oLJWcabig0c5fPfcIIiYz4YIjJqtSsXbZ8McWXiszh6knzlRwGTSdS+QZ nUlFMqiqY56mRK7QzrDvjl7wMda3IlMjbGhe3UR3UYkJsuwAtae3NLL028X3O7XBb fWPKpKY+XHcDTeMyLoKtOVqKwbkTrWPS1aSd6Vt7Bp5TVOd58nQphzTKpSfT0m/yc nr528ywIdZOec9Ur5hAOQJvF/yuhEnHwXVEHevMK9wJieMqDHtbyQKz5S5vc4ggD8 3q/xjYlk6kt3dSvKjMq9gPGbntYej3lQjWLhtcvjOrwDxxUnMKqL3/lxb24M3IT2B TGXm0Lp4D4HzLVWgbw== X-UI-Sender-Class: 814a7b36-bfc1-4dae-8640-3722d8ec6cd6 Received: from drachen.dragon ([92.75.138.198]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb106 [213.165.67.124]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MC0LH-1tDUQ93FKn-00CRDb; Fri, 18 Oct 2024 04:10:32 +0200 From: Michael Heerdegen To: Stefan Monnier via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; and-let* is useless In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier via's message of "Thu, 17 Oct 2024 12:27:39 -0400") References: Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2024 04:11:23 +0200 Message-ID: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:fqPrUTvdy7WFcGiYL7MBolt+TahdoZidxr5Cc3BcycjE3oF5EZm j9GEIFNeljSA2OC5lV7UiL3qPVub3QOLbrJYi4+w5y4TZqSE1vBk7jAvg2sOJ+OksQDwIc2 wmzMx4AXNscOSXcdLBGqxuWlMC7bZscWVi2Akze6l3G6RO1x8p4fS0SE/w6F2Q3bwrp8azJ +vkEqb+vgv+J0v0TYl5CQ== X-Spam-Flag: NO UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:k4mOxB2oqBI=;r+B8OGY/4PmcW1nFSNo6CQ4RZeX ozR/OeJrks4CkmjoXkYCmvVtZH8wBwHD0mPrQkmfXIemqKxAPKbqMu6UEgV7DdbTc2huIkkOW 5oKiah1tskY9rKbVOzcRCCUmS3KfyKxPOxEgoQMvRo7XjiIsvyqyns2+ncOS/MJ5VEGXZsNv9 6E4TgQNWcyFyYdTQ0c3h4iyg1Vr2FT4yumzQ1XtxLiPMiE31IiYQCcZ2kMHqvBe7fp+wJK/Lq dfQAelkFG8FEFnOCS38xzkY6PuJ+P88MbbFazGxu4wIcNa+wPQ8Nn/nbeW7hqlfvBD47ZQYTC fBE9PBMKORj3Zg0my3NuU9CZGELNZDeoOkbfb4s8sJ9GsJaQEK9wY5OUyQQA+9ftQlEQ3yAL+ lowP1t1pRv3WeJXDcykR24L7eRZAyxZ0yeQXg6AnpLCNi5qgxhfaMByrCFTqx+5x4MXoCdQnx UWC5rYpTT/30khe8VQgKDH8eGAitOYoO1OePY5TW2gMSPRd0AgkuKxBvljE6q5vsr0kzEKBli dB64ba5mnfl/vjuIP/NwUyfpuB/UF05sRfQPgxR5VaLnYq8yN7Z7mBunhEY/xGnnYnCmF/flW Tnf3BqqAGG1gQwmx611EID0jTexXggTXsxwCNee5yMM7KhjEi/6d2BeVgG9PQ031dNMDenVR1 NVVY5fdpiRgCCIposn33iJFdXYhdl8USB6WLA1EYMeZKU8d9vTZhyzEBObwLClv4zCGLGULti aShgzIDjPBIfmMyCmH+DMSqhuiMXA1TbeUnHubVplThdQt7MbZA8wH7vjnQU36oqpiqwCArZt 4KJlWt5gBMmyGEfrtg0Qq2+Q== Received-SPF: pass client-ip=217.72.192.78; envelope-from=michael_heerdegen@web.de; helo=mout.web.de X-Spam_score_int: -40 X-Spam_score: -4.1 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-1.277, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: -1.3 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit Cc: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Monnier X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) Stefan Monnier via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" writes: > Can we kill/deprecate this? `and-let*'s purpose is to express conditions, `when-let*'s is conditional evaluation. We have `and-let*' and `when-let*' for the same reason we have `and' and `when'. See prior discussions. > [ I think we have too many (if|when|and)-let(*) for our own good: we > should pick some winners and deprecate the other ones. ] AFAIR the non-star versions exist for backward compatibility only - so I would rather get rid of these. Parallel existence of these non-star vs. star versions should be a temporary state, it complicates the matter for an epsilon gain. > I could see a use for something called `and-let(*)` but without a BODY, > for the purpose of remove a level of parens and indentation: > > (and-let* > (x1 (foo1)) > (x2 (foo2))) > > i.s.o > > (and-let* > ((x1 (foo1)) > (x2 (foo2)))) Ugh! - I could not imagine anything with more potential for confusion as removing the paren around a list of bindings. This would add one more year-lasting round of discussing these constructs. If you do this, please call it `and-let*?@!' so than everybody is warned. Michael. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Oct 18 19:43:26 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Oct 2024 23:43:26 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40477 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t1wcw-000372-50 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 18 Oct 2024 19:43:26 -0400 Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:43849) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t1wct-00036Z-CU for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 18 Oct 2024 19:43:24 -0400 Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 67033809CE; Fri, 18 Oct 2024 19:42:53 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1729294972; bh=0TkGkIkbiGI+Uc6ZMUWhJS7jQdFS48zsT4sHkfwP84I=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=eJvrSGHxKso2HiLj6upNAyWMpBJZg9dsgl3VDOUmDftb8BBPDqy7So0LBuLSlBjbQ ypjqPOlDMJ/D4tB22PD7n9lGW7Nvl1TjRZHl8mRc7IQQVoUGtCcRD4Zj87n2q01rHR 6a3E1uKTsrZR94KqWZL/E7ZZmLTuOx9NvzBIRqumapCSF8B0xDV8qeZrc8dgptY422 k3WoswO0ORuStMyuexNfCjnFbP6T6WXjugO9jetvoemN1knHHsEcLHo9lOizhBbbex zy7Ekxpmd4sdFdqbfhxOlpkMeSJJLUnKmQaHnZawYXgiX+lrjAZJ4aj6nGv0+JNsqU euHq3vHAe9auw== Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id F23F380926; Fri, 18 Oct 2024 19:42:51 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pastel (69-196-161-60.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.196.161.60]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7F974120776; Fri, 18 Oct 2024 19:42:51 -0400 (EDT) From: Stefan Monnier To: Michael Heerdegen Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; and-let* is useless In-Reply-To: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> (Michael Heerdegen's message of "Fri, 18 Oct 2024 04:11:23 +0200") Message-ID: References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> Date: Fri, 18 Oct 2024 19:42:44 -0400 User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-SPAM-INFO: Spam detection results: 0 ALL_TRUSTED -1 Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain DKIM_VALID_EF -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from domain X-SPAM-LEVEL: X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) >> Can we kill/deprecate this? > `and-let*'s purpose is to express conditions, `when-let*'s is > conditional evaluation. We have `and-let*' and `when-let*' for the same > reason we have `and' and `when'. See prior discussions. But there isn't the same "historical" support that justifies having both, and the syntax&semantics of `and-let*` is just weird: - Why allow a BODY if the motivation is to mirror the normal `and`? If you want a BODY, use `when-let*`. - What's the use of the final variable binding since (assuming you don't use BODY) that variable is never used: (and-let* ((a (fooa)) (b (foob a)) (i-m-useless (fooc a b)))) - There's a special syntax where the final binding can drop the variable name (because of the previous point), which makes for an odd syntax (and-let* ((a (fooa)) (b (foob a)) ((weird-call a b)))) So the use with BODY is redundant with `when-let*` and the use without BODY is quirky (and still redundant with `when-let*`, of course). >> [ I think we have too many (if|when|and)-let(*) for our own good: we >> should pick some winners and deprecate the other ones. ] > AFAIR the non-star versions exist for backward compatibility only - so I > would rather get rid of these. Parallel existence of these non-star > vs. star versions should be a temporary state, it complicates the matter > for an epsilon gain. 100% agreement. Can we `make-obsolete` the non-star versions? >> I could see a use for something called `and-let(*)` but without a BODY, >> for the purpose of remove a level of parens and indentation: >> >> (and-let* >> (x1 (foo1)) >> (x2 (foo2))) >> >> i.s.o >> >> (and-let* >> ((x1 (foo1)) >> (x2 (foo2)))) > > Ugh! - I could not imagine anything with more potential for confusion as > removing the paren around a list of bindings. FWIW, I agree, I don't like that either. Stefan From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Oct 18 23:38:40 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 19 Oct 2024 03:38:40 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40754 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t20IZ-0005gI-RA for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 18 Oct 2024 23:38:40 -0400 Received: from sendmail.purelymail.com ([34.202.193.197]:49772) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t20IX-0005g4-EM for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 18 Oct 2024 23:38:38 -0400 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=M7mFzjgMaNzwayEN/QCFeLRZn2E+NvYNY+sr4nSjGRj21J/cx9wZizn2iL2jhm8qlgojLwcQzz4pCYQEWxSEOY+QDdAL0CfB3Fxstzwn5ku6RoO+wXuadgHo4xWkUVbvZpIWrMc4wlFYvfDiXC7SsTmX0k524SMrMxV1muGsBUg8rwVYjTWRi2UXORmyHMaCWSVUIOL1CAUXGYx1GKJfQ6M/SVEuxSXmG0SInNQcG+Prg96HMDTX3ELr64d9uchCMFuO7pmJh2vXUe0T8Ur6lL82fOMdxS6xpH0BxvfiFA2Za2MTptDAkVbuBCzFPg21lbLK5pC6sCP8FvEt5jsi/w==; s=purelymail1; d=spwhitton.name; v=1; bh=5Zf/DuoYZbX56SB0n9F5LUyUmaaZffBFoHJFJA4i3qc=; h=Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date; DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=k75OasLMh4nguvbXt2QVwZU5I54DtsqcZ2t3CLDuRJChSE/MjNL+pSu0fIkUG4E71KM8SeEqEsAKaR9xJgZLM3zR9YwA6TH1SgICyDOuScJ9YVKAkoDYPjmlQtSJq3XwYJZu3MIExXW0dB1g/wSLOwOIab+OXZk1920loPTaz7jsZI7qpU0D5J6CJNIYdUD4SrV9kM2Kw1aBAPRwxPJrxd5MUVApuYewM9ifITC5xYwwU4uLfUnqtoRFbMyKu4RsiX7SAjdcOo5FuwKmER5QL0qK5J1TtnEpvkTRNgc0h2Sx354MkEPPH3IZY0kRnL+I5+5RIO3d1WMgvpdsmoDiiw==; s=purelymail1; d=purelymail.com; v=1; bh=5Zf/DuoYZbX56SB0n9F5LUyUmaaZffBFoHJFJA4i3qc=; h=Feedback-ID:Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date; Feedback-ID: 20115:3760:null:purelymail X-Pm-Original-To: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org Received: by smtp.purelymail.com (Purelymail SMTP) with ESMTPSA id -2082500998; (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384); Sat, 19 Oct 2024 03:38:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: by melete.silentflame.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 320DA7E6817; Sat, 19 Oct 2024 11:38:01 +0800 (CST) From: Sean Whitton To: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; and-let* is useless In-Reply-To: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> (Michael Heerdegen via's message of "Fri, 18 Oct 2024 04:11:23 +0200") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2024 11:38:01 +0800 Message-ID: <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: Michael Heerdegen , monnier@iro.umontreal.ca X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hello, On Fri 18 Oct 2024 at 04:11am +02, Michael Heerdegen via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" wrote: > `and-let*'s purpose is to express conditions, `when-let*'s is > conditional evaluation. We have `and-let*' and `when-let*' for the > same reason we have `and' and `when'. See prior discussions. Right. The Lisp convention of using `when' for pure control flow and `and' for returning values is a good aid to readability. If we don't have and-let*, then we can't use this convention in the case that we also want to bind variables. So, I am very keen for and-let* to remain. >> [ I think we have too many (if|when|and)-let(*) for our own good: we >> should pick some winners and deprecate the other ones. ] > > AFAIR the non-star versions exist for backward compatibility only - so > I would rather get rid of these. Parallel existence of these non-star > vs. star versions should be a temporary state, it complicates the > matter for an epsilon gain. Yes. I would like us to move forward with removing the non-star ones. I believe there was a previous attempt to deprecate them but it had to be backed out. But maybe now is the time to try again. -- Sean Whitton From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Oct 18 23:50:35 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 19 Oct 2024 03:50:35 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40775 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t20U7-0006H7-4M for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 18 Oct 2024 23:50:35 -0400 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.17.11]:60079) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t20U4-0006BA-Lb for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 18 Oct 2024 23:50:33 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=web.de; s=s29768273; t=1729309793; x=1729914593; i=michael_heerdegen@web.de; bh=Waj8dy8efgPEAdCL/oUAga/luc3d1Af24zi7p0AmPWw=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date: Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:cc:content-transfer-encoding: content-type:date:from:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject: to; b=WhILvEnp1SI+MvSlW3/x+KXbgIAX5gSGuzwwQWxMOUuu1+bviT9hijrjKrDKt6OY tnuliSjKSF7Q8oLiK6jsaW7/Q0xFzC4Z2snBHrulJ+SUSVB0cy7rX/9XcPaS2NkX5 pU+NfI0V5DKXafQMCav4qxSvD6RIaC/CiG7fczAu/zTmh2NJzpXpbgV6BXAryAWIy l/qkIY3oQwHdNhYlhUyBDMAOfY7MUPezQcx0wVEyB5GStJ7d22t+ZKQhncFLdoep0 IYBDp2jgi6knP0V4y6FUSs0fNFnueOk8VY7FpIjqLp2Fokt4KN8BkfucQoa/n/Qu0 CWaKHg4nyr8FkNFBPA== X-UI-Sender-Class: 814a7b36-bfc1-4dae-8640-3722d8ec6cd6 Received: from drachen.dragon ([92.75.138.198]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb106 [213.165.67.124]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1N9cHX-1tyDKP3yGz-015cD2; Sat, 19 Oct 2024 05:49:53 +0200 From: Michael Heerdegen To: Stefan Monnier Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; and-let* is useless In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Fri, 18 Oct 2024 19:42:44 -0400") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> Date: Sat, 19 Oct 2024 05:50:49 +0200 Message-ID: <87sess3g4m.fsf@web.de> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:sbCJjrAxJsqEG8xsuYlt+OnvNv50QMnsrTqUA4PqbM2PGsOZG7b qJtjfHiiK3O0DK26u6RxU9KkxS89QqgWuIXT3tft0GmuqSKjeQY3t5TO4FhFlB3W1YLmIBX gixulmDcs7k3575XdMiyoh7wOZ6/xHdJwtyaPc0pZKYascwIbcqPBtwYkpoJhRNraE08YQ+ 2xzJjOd20sK72bAVzSzTQ== X-Spam-Flag: NO UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:P4yUjJJxDV0=;ZOg7+beWVyUXfsTP+rUjs0a3cEa /4xsYwTQrFSzqpGIHwMMipRHwZbgeZAR6FG5Mu5CHfxcpjgK5Hm6pRvR7oEaO7tHYcvzW/Wfp 3w8fM1HAt42EYQX4jSqa6IyA7Z+9bIJd4QgV8R8cXi6x30LGor9d9vb1TnDXm58nc2iK7gx1D /1VKh+8JKlp7mxAo76W8sM/TeKoI+Mxo58/VjEe+GohhYR6laPyFCrdV+MTxH9xk6fPdvFgHm w19TwWbOpnlgm0hwR6yyliXj+hOMSH4Vvq4+C30IRJhVs8bFLUlCiaBO2rIJXvHccgl+fdDVH LzQrqxBAOfEfLzU0MnAaBWiot5TVqdxH64Obqsw9E4MUwRj5m7SM/gPhnsw2upQ9ePBLzNJgq IGFV0u5ioWva/0FdQNNd6QnzuzRbK6EoObIc+iDUjnYOLXbweKf57Yx3okn3KuE6hRVFA8RWe /POF4sdy+8IjmQMosz6AXpkopPsxNlfOC1Xq85/XZ326FrLjGPcQ1oSZFsTsFsMerW0I5jArs QgQYM3bwCudVirHeQbbzkCP7DXSu5jxoGhHTsRKDi7t7IBnQwGLk81CSzkQgTSVn6YcMjsr1e l/PFinR3KECs+N2U0pQucHVR0Wthgt1ysG9Ht/d2ZVPMlsGio50mX7POKZ+gXT+TluYNtldjw zWJhMUrBEn4F3gv89qr/qdMJJmIshKciQfLyjtp7TJUPdOYfel1ALrIq/aPr3C9FyVOF1vwiQ hZvINbJyLyiBMnr1HoSL7L01OQgkvxngPKy1qdfXojDcrSscNdOtkUJ2wh2UGb4FMgGaZ95ES rs5jtcpsFbV8EKy9WNEqj2eA== X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Stefan Monnier writes: > But there isn't the same "historical" support that justifies having > both, and the syntax&semantics of `and-let*` is just weird: > > - Why allow a BODY if the motivation is to mirror the normal `and`? > If you want a BODY, use `when-let*`. > - What's the use of the final variable binding since (assuming you > don't use BODY) that variable is never used: > > (and-let* ((a (fooa)) > (b (foob a)) > (i-m-useless (fooc a b)))) One could say BODY _is_ the final condition and therefore it has a special syntax because it necessarily doesn't need a binding. That way I've my peace with that syntax. Anyway, removing `and-let*' would be equally unsatisfying, and obviously, at least one the two points will remain unless we change the syntax radically - or remove `and-let*' :-( > - There's a special syntax where the final binding can drop the variable > name (because of the previous point), which makes for an odd syntax > > (and-let* ((a (fooa)) > (b (foob a)) > ((weird-call a b)))) That I feel too. As an alternative we made the pseudo variable _ work without compiler warnings. But one gets used to the variable-less syntax. It's too handy... > So the use with BODY is redundant with `when-let*` and the use without > BODY is quirky (and still redundant with `when-let*`, of course). I see your points, but don't consider them as such a big problem. Anyway, without having something that is obviously better the discussion remains quite philosophical. And replacing calls of `and-let*' with equivalent calls of `when-let*' doesn't make code easier to read, IMO. > 100% agreement. Can we `make-obsolete` the non-star versions? I hope we can. Michael. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Oct 20 08:25:37 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Oct 2024 12:25:37 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46241 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t2V05-0004qx-2p for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 20 Oct 2024 08:25:37 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-f49.google.com ([209.85.208.49]:49465) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t2V02-0004lG-MN for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 20 Oct 2024 08:25:35 -0400 Received: by mail-ed1-f49.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-5c903f5bd0eso6471858a12.3 for <73853@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sun, 20 Oct 2024 05:25:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1729427043; x=1730031843; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=AP2RoXySPAZtNOFPHeuhAdF7u86NVAeDMya3A5oy85I=; b=Xzz1plnPDr367AVyUqueH0sO1hKf2PSK38vRgdTziw0aDCpaWGXTK07/utQj8/dq97 ojirRDidyloJiPL43qJL7pUA/2JaF7F0JDK2qXoqOifxXIunAM9A0WwNjeS59vu20Puk msxOCQBrveleDN/rMj6n613O9Od5fJMfKGPnPPhZbpifr0kzbhDVkF0cE1bk5YBktTal Fs1daS9r99shnoJLONrR8zlZWIyiTXrUD6F87EXbH7HU5Cy+zDioqtW+XVwEXIqBReu5 RmG5/VWLjM+7a6a6FQy+0w6jqywONMC552edkAWqWkX7DQs5O2DdiTxbWeTUAQP25aNd c8LQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1729427043; x=1730031843; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=AP2RoXySPAZtNOFPHeuhAdF7u86NVAeDMya3A5oy85I=; b=MHmoW2PfwteP6XFi4a25LRUBYBZB+1DqOp5RxJkkAXfBTm0xfUUliIQvy8W2bfNPGq eKqFp60GW0tCYzDVymYID6kABJU/Q51p5fZ0fzgp/cfCu5SXIiaNQ69UAhJBmxUidB+U KY4NHJpUt89phobbII/eBAWNQn+TgW3Vpd6X2keW9gRubaASQGOU1Z4CyMDlLqvLEw9D 9wySCBUztvZEMd+aJNaJh4ukiD2SffO/OkOECNfsN6axPRU4L/bhAlm8Q5RiiX91FcH5 7TcY5HhJq01G7oSFm7ap6cBWML0enHLADSgdfhgk9Agix7fiEPLPb/FTFUKPGOGNQDS+ RZAw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCUsEID692zgD5moXHvoz49SzE/jcAcaDwaZR1UGz+osxPdhZYhaDMeChg8CQp/ZB7FxZ5TBFw==@debbugs.gnu.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyKHHqG4clxuNLHOjPmyoQH8tVY9eavEOakyIDm/zxQjsxSLZO1 xJ8f4kyZpySicUSqbEelWhl5frBIviL8cLFRngvcGMTeK9EmFYhQA3X7seihJ7HtZlsh/SpdGfa rdENgbENq+43d2lL8P7/KyxxRRjc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGPauOOLKL/Ite9sipJWE88K6I5rUl5+Y2kIw/okFNKtpKWFMSYI9oFH1j/w10ieNIHgxGGW4hJlh/6zy1nCi0= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:524c:b0:5c9:7f41:eb19 with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-5ca0ac790a0mr5897967a12.4.1729427043181; Sun, 20 Oct 2024 05:24:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 753933720722 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Sun, 20 Oct 2024 05:24:02 -0700 From: Stefan Kangas In-Reply-To: <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2024 05:24:02 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; and-let* is useless To: Sean Whitton , 73853@debbugs.gnu.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: Michael Heerdegen , monnier@iro.umontreal.ca X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Sean Whitton writes: > I would like us to move forward with removing the non-star ones. I also agree that removing them would make sense. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Oct 21 03:08:18 2024 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Oct 2024 07:08:18 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49858 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t2mWX-0000Uq-NI for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 21 Oct 2024 03:08:18 -0400 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:54902) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t2mWW-0000Uj-Ax for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 21 Oct 2024 03:08:16 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t2mW5-0007YW-QQ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Oct 2024 03:07:49 -0400 Received: from mail-lf1-x130.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::130]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t2mW4-0003ue-6L for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Oct 2024 03:07:49 -0400 Received: by mail-lf1-x130.google.com with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-53a007743e7so4754821e87.1 for ; Mon, 21 Oct 2024 00:07:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1729494466; x=1730099266; darn=gnu.org; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to :subject:cc:to:from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=TEbFQXAbE4EnVwfEWf2mx6myEEjbMc12hVa7PzNjaKM=; b=Wt9OvayQZUUIxctBfN3vw3zW3YhFhYG71fJwPU00/xeu35XY2jJ7EsURrGo0rPpYO+ pcbZ+aZDtqXxU+p+OVhF2hJXd+t7CNbpi0EvnLmtvkmg+hINzMuLtKgnnw9rPEClENfF i7btDhJ7A3s3L4O1GJnACp5vAppgw3ucrNnN3n6WhvCtH0EJzRxUrEB3vUQqP7L7cIv9 UD+L1q77jIhoLrRbdXzxoXml3Ehxk03m7Y6SnpjF1CFCnaDG4+AxaRX3XR4Qw+ojY7Jb rNxVGcqIs7s3Nh4Aeq0xGOgPzQJHFvCu9Fey/PS3vsoyiR1uPKJ8QqIxyTKCdBjTORsi 2tlQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1729494466; x=1730099266; h=mime-version:user-agent:message-id:date:references:in-reply-to :subject:cc:to:from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date :message-id:reply-to; bh=TEbFQXAbE4EnVwfEWf2mx6myEEjbMc12hVa7PzNjaKM=; b=JuB3EktdBmkdmUs/+SQjSZRvYF81nyrnCJYHSxAPEzEkSNqGndDAnAkkr2NqcnW3DA 9ljLuI/AexBXmQXFmWvJSvDNJO4fPi7vYgdmNkaDj09zpxnbNVggz6QzA70CoycL2kWn eQEAWoRiaigjkoss3TmlQfDa9qfEfULYpVJjpgHwj5czMQHTVNLpDlwayQeGiwmvcxsE iCNubn/lfPTpE+hXDJ2mkVb3ixOPJ9u22Rr6MDyiERQML7IFUe9g/oiWHwzyLOfgscH6 T8i/PVK1Fv3FTTHaN9FawqL528yh+QSakQSJuVSDCUXzfVGfGp6qDTcODTa9YsTTzqtk ZDRg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yxtb3YALc20RQgJiQ8smOflE7gI0IpAifi3Y+YmnjSyGIoHfZoS quo5rkNsmkyJ8OnDj2k6oItOV5AGNgpUlPHYnYANoYCDVB4/xfAG X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFKe29sWyeIlxLoHrGuq13nYejJlyFb/T+mqj/od1lLVrWvlQ3D7tVom0UexOag6I7Mjw9VIg== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6512:3b0f:b0:536:56d8:24b4 with SMTP id 2adb3069b0e04-53a154417b9mr3712250e87.5.1729494465521; Mon, 21 Oct 2024 00:07:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from ars3 ([2a02:8109:8a87:ff00::d6f6]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-5cb66a6a734sm1627365a12.58.2024.10.21.00.07.43 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Mon, 21 Oct 2024 00:07:43 -0700 (PDT) From: Augusto Stoffel To: Stefan Monnier via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; and-let* is useless In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier via's message of "Fri, 18 Oct 2024 19:42:44 -0400") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 09:07:42 +0200 Message-ID: <87r08akk75.fsf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::130; envelope-from=arstoffel@gmail.com; helo=mail-lf1-x130.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: -1.3 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit Cc: Michael Heerdegen , Stefan Monnier , 73853@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) On Fri, 18 Oct 2024 at 19:42, Stefan Monnier via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" wrote: >>> [ I think we have too many (if|when|and)-let(*) for our own good: we >>> should pick some winners and deprecate the other ones. ] >> AFAIR the non-star versions exist for backward compatibility only - so I >> would rather get rid of these. Parallel existence of these non-star >> vs. star versions should be a temporary state, it complicates the matter >> for an epsilon gain. > > 100% agreement. Can we `make-obsolete` the non-star versions? Wait... The point of make-obsolete is to generate warning so people migrate their code, right? So why not warn on the weird (single-variable binding) use of the non-star version, to eventually remove that syntax as well as the star variants? I always type `if-let' because it looks cleaner and saves one indentation column (which are purely cosmetic reasons), but also I think it would be weird to have a something* when there's no accompanying something. >>> I could see a use for something called `and-let(*)` but without a BODY, >>> for the purpose of remove a level of parens and indentation: >>> >>> (and-let* >>> (x1 (foo1)) >>> (x2 (foo2))) >>> >>> i.s.o >>> >>> (and-let* >>> ((x1 (foo1)) >>> (x2 (foo2)))) >> >> Ugh! - I could not imagine anything with more potential for confusion as >> removing the paren around a list of bindings. > > FWIW, I agree, I don't like that either. Sure, I guess nobody wants that, but this idea is getting closer to a `thread-while' macro (variation of `thread-as') which I still maintain would be really handy (much more so than the existing ones, which are limited by the inconsistency of the argument ordering in Elisp). From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Oct 21 04:57:12 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Oct 2024 08:57:12 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50191 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t2oDv-0005YK-Qj for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 21 Oct 2024 04:57:12 -0400 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.15.4]:49089) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t2oDt-0005Y5-EA for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 21 Oct 2024 04:57:10 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=web.de; s=s29768273; t=1729500986; x=1730105786; i=michael_heerdegen@web.de; bh=DAM/eGbBYYpzoBLUCltjgIk3Mhi0LnMoinxmazyBClk=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date: Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:cc:content-transfer-encoding: content-type:date:from:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject: to; b=hgrQgOWg17wTzajUKLBPyOYZvrBFQwc4GJY8Y0Gbt6wycTruUhstIl+u70oC/vRM ZwtE1JhLR2JQ/2TPHf8sxzf3YGTDIC1C1dbo+bC2UTO6XQKsyrtrsK090miv+bL9W YOG0B24Mj8Z1lq/Kh2t7qtXdVlTYDyAYhUrfZ0tMr6/T8aIN86gmBQq+JAWp5g1Qi eJqTfEnsmj0N4waKrBhUSs7mEBwOrlwevLoZjbAmePkVgbmRS5IyhpH0BanYGGX/K HHCmFyAhoADgzvbUXPyQccx7HjaP7AxPfFkpaimL3P9F63VuEzEiTAJatSid+dulC /Wt3eBtQKKgfdCnhQw== X-UI-Sender-Class: 814a7b36-bfc1-4dae-8640-3722d8ec6cd6 Received: from drachen.dragon ([92.75.138.198]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb006 [213.165.67.108]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MOUxu-1tGbzw1iJS-00Pvrz; Mon, 21 Oct 2024 10:56:26 +0200 From: Michael Heerdegen To: Augusto Stoffel Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; and-let* is useless In-Reply-To: <87r08akk75.fsf@gmail.com> (Augusto Stoffel's message of "Mon, 21 Oct 2024 09:07:42 +0200") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87r08akk75.fsf@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 10:57:12 +0200 Message-ID: <878quh6dg7.fsf@web.de> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:6oKjuOCeOfMXrBaEttwhrcFjpWtQmVfDi+BkYvG6oLHV4035KrI IJEe7GRfKW+Njk6oDfB/enFy/ydAOyPzL62cUWDuTY/KrDuJXV2Se2sqd3+SJ9WhbEiIuz5 GqNnIvzYojD88S38QtmQKpezpDaB+gNh7oZLgYr1e81P9ycuOXL1fpzw3TB4tBzSdiuOSZu 4WDFQoNY8IIasSruBENgg== X-Spam-Flag: NO UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:e3VI6mMG7Sk=;0XHqCG7WCMTembjWeiiirwbiUn2 X9Un8E5EuS26Buw7qE8pYlQc8wAAIj7bky7CHUQJm6KJ2hXhdml48vKBOgQqPz4Xh2Qq5MZ9L w8jFqA9o2CycleScOLD/XpEsy9El/vIuwhWQ3QJDfXqZz6yddOtYt7IBEKZ81mW4uRZRib+/G uoePc8kQO9iPL3Ber+x7SXEIDkxfECRI/yX1pPlJXKzOyrMNvnOY5r9pydO1E+ykDA7rGV4l9 YIGEEXKSg+6wZdU4Mw0qyMjYKujLC4TtzleHQR9Bl7WirN++TuVAmM5IGHgmoWrZBf4rmaTF6 pGKzo6M88/+7okdHosY/QT9E2y8flQbs1CAZstKvYRjbKtrUglp3wP4Vjx1aH5kw/EtHx6UbB QzV3BkkUx6Qz4EWZ0eNykpg5jlLnTLNawZN8c1fGv22b2/Bzuf7lMFyyjbiBwAd7b9F8mAOA9 16Ihz4OWP6f6r3dm4ZBNBewZZpshYHEgvCuznRpiZlLQ21Pl/zr8NxTSLYskepgNkO63Kb+8p Y+ILqGySbIadaTAPOpAwxy6kd77iVRrK7oOf4C5T9gVyqE+uTOkLUpoWY/t+9RiFE1pPgo1OK WHlfCwBwUJlB8kZirjymYd0OqgLft106gnB2iLW18CuBa1IAOhz8xfqyGKFAOPI+ojiJ+XL7z MxLearhSC8UMamCVcekDrVlfp5ONbpo5vp9lksF4+MmaYtn2AAao+P/9I3NnF6m3I2T1KULza FsTBf4QeyOc+T7UuMOjXIXw4kn0W1qDHEtPKaXTdd5afOtVc+MgxQJRoe7ayIqM+TbWub/eHK qGoCZlQ0JzXtQiUoePV+DVxA== X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: "Stefan Monnier via Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" , Stefan Monnier , 73853@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) Augusto Stoffel writes: > I always type `if-let' because it looks cleaner and saves one indentation > column (which are purely cosmetic reasons), but also I think it would be > weird to have a something* when there's no accompanying something. Good point, we should decide which names to use. Personally i prefer the names ending with star, because bindings are not parallel as in `let'. But we also already spoke about this. Dunno which names are more popular, it's a matter of taste. Michael. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Oct 21 08:09:43 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Oct 2024 12:09:43 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50492 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t2rEF-0005w8-HL for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 21 Oct 2024 08:09:43 -0400 Received: from sendmail.purelymail.com ([34.202.193.197]:51642) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t2rED-0005vt-4L for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 21 Oct 2024 08:09:42 -0400 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=RtTmRDpqqGL6QuNpdYsWHH3EjVpWQjmSoiLfCZIBRbG8Jghr0/ViEVLI7NfRNSkV4sNCVNvPQ0Ki+4pSHCbxYHDe1+zlBWrjaGbugqxoDsetl0ceXibJSaXTmten1aNAX5WXToRSZX8X1JIvuGlJhNc4xnKxHMaEMZfZmBgDn/eqCFX7kTxWuy2zo2w8Aei/geS9s5nBW/yU0+65hKpXMZgb9dik6dAa3BqOjZ2ETtVayaBvJlaJXA5y3LkUrVwLLKvGi9sYCqcuLDHhWWYmGgz47z6u4JLiRKm7LsdY+563EBcAXyq5XZnYih34q+AGhkcQo1Z1YikuzepxlV/jxQ==; s=purelymail1; d=spwhitton.name; v=1; bh=qnQfmtQJA5OWAGxUFEvELW98eyCx4QMEgIaptCcXOv8=; h=Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date; DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=cgbJWiGkNjf0n4hkim2cjPnQlmsN+dI2ag4pg+w5QabxFE5q6jykXtEuMDjjlwBZqNwXNQ7ZzNIUqgqFIITVO+1Lzs76kSv4kWOQ/hLRrvesPpYSF/Gs7fg+Vv7ZM8Q25kJ5MBRSjw4d/IcsbZOij1u0iJ6/jeZRIOSFw6tIWT+QQ8DyOt9xvrzRRWPrPSRg5DplaoxveISnGOsKBqEf0gjynOGMf2P4f87gk6j9X2bjWLq2wjpxfKTn+TE5WvYJ0A/lnLOcOGwhx2UbPNMAM2pjkccgU+UtiVxGw8ZfUwdqxHGjAbPBEUMDl9jwt07XeLrdqaH2XBE0zLVPqMHpGw==; s=purelymail1; d=purelymail.com; v=1; bh=qnQfmtQJA5OWAGxUFEvELW98eyCx4QMEgIaptCcXOv8=; h=Feedback-ID:Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date; Feedback-ID: 20115:3760:null:purelymail X-Pm-Original-To: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org Received: by smtp.purelymail.com (Purelymail SMTP) with ESMTPSA id 414641136; (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384); Mon, 21 Oct 2024 12:09:08 +0000 (UTC) Received: by melete.silentflame.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 8E4217E980D; Mon, 21 Oct 2024 20:09:04 +0800 (CST) From: Sean Whitton To: Augusto Stoffel Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; and-let* is useless In-Reply-To: <878quh6dg7.fsf@web.de> (Michael Heerdegen via's message of "Mon, 21 Oct 2024 10:57:12 +0200") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87r08akk75.fsf@gmail.com> <878quh6dg7.fsf@web.de> Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2024 20:09:04 +0800 Message-ID: <87y12hirof.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: Michael Heerdegen , 73853@debbugs.gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hello, On Mon 21 Oct 2024 at 10:57am +02, Michael Heerdegen via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" wrote: > Augusto Stoffel writes: > >> I always type `if-let' because it looks cleaner and saves one indentation >> column (which are purely cosmetic reasons), but also I think it would be >> weird to have a something* when there's no accompanying something. > > Good point, we should decide which names to use. Personally i prefer > the names ending with star, because bindings are not parallel as in > `let'. But we also already spoke about this. Dunno which names are > more popular, it's a matter of taste. I prefer if-let* for this reason too. Also: - it informs a reader that there is no way they are going to see the unusual single binding syntax. - Common Lisp's ubiquitous Alexandria library of basic utilities has an if-let which has the unusual single binding syntax. In fact, that is probably where our if-let came from. So if we are moving away from that, it makes sense to use a different name for the thing we invented -- if-let*. -- Sean Whitton From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Oct 22 10:48:09 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Oct 2024 14:48:09 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56873 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t3GB6-0007Cw-Qw for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 22 Oct 2024 10:48:09 -0400 Received: from sendmail.purelymail.com ([34.202.193.197]:45636) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t3GB2-0007CJ-Oc for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 22 Oct 2024 10:48:07 -0400 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=H8cODX01TsnO821lYxA5v8szUx+sCtLxVfKS3+wFARc9NP/nh+uYxRiQ1ex1D8j6oeD+TNrIudadHd1vfIbqsv0s/Jjn1ZwO/wh3PGkEIptckxoxl7WOQYQGmv2eBqL5xlS0qfvNp3mxANhLhvapRkElXeVgq4/jkLZxKe1L6QzIx0Sww3OARlE7aVw4M/o1jMWHEWhXp1Kfdr4P28z9hfSsLkGN+cSwrCOOnbOnwgGcaxRq60E6TV6BukjhDX8IFRL4/o3uLGuI5ORc9InOWuQQRLFbTb8nNxh+xVNIOr3IipX+9GQBRtCHFl57FAKp/OrSFk4BTZ8rHc/tO+ZI5A==; s=purelymail2; d=spwhitton.name; v=1; bh=bg6cN6CQvZ6Z7s78MejR2tLZGTulxLNk1JBz7OjqjVg=; h=Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date; DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=vTUJYEhb/glzgxolVwXQMcDWtv276sEoKNwLK5ELuiCnkx3XH4qfQqVdOeHkYukaS+mwSLw/AOLSzVs/y4inVy+CSONm6vA94oAr4CqRp26QmFXSxuzYyz009kwaoCgx1ja1MbgPLmnR1GVHcg+tKFo8C1ZFukGA07c6JHn+hTrDWXhPpGwjREInan06eJqLwYT8Oh81FYyYZqjJ0SbJ/nDawbmV+rjqas6k9YMaKEMURgU60h2oGZmXI0+zV11wgSqPull080ayEzFjfT46cF885Dh6FhS4j6xOe3NGt2TatLpe7AHM2ATP/lsCTLiMFE7HXC9QVUnasiTgzfwWoA==; s=purelymail2; d=purelymail.com; v=1; bh=bg6cN6CQvZ6Z7s78MejR2tLZGTulxLNk1JBz7OjqjVg=; h=Feedback-ID:Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date; Feedback-ID: 20115:3760:null:purelymail X-Pm-Original-To: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org Received: by smtp.purelymail.com (Purelymail SMTP) with ESMTPSA id -1916239675; (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384); Tue, 22 Oct 2024 14:47:30 +0000 (UTC) Received: by melete.silentflame.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D69667E09E6; Tue, 22 Oct 2024 22:47:24 +0800 (CST) From: Sean Whitton To: Stefan Kangas , Michael Heerdegen , monnier@iro.umontreal.ca Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: (Stefan Kangas's message of "Sun, 20 Oct 2024 05:24:02 -0700") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2024 22:47:24 +0800 Message-ID: <87ed48b3er.fsf_-_@melete.silentflame.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: control@debbugs.gnu.org, 73853@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) retitle 73853 Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? thanks Hello, On Sun 20 Oct 2024 at 05:24am -07, Stefan Kangas wrote: > Sean Whitton writes: > >> I would like us to move forward with removing the non-star ones. > > I also agree that removing them would make sense. I've found the old discussion on this: - https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=60758#58 - https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2018-03/msg00052.html - https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2018-03/msg00219.html Based on my reading of this thread and those old discussions, I conclude - it is fine to mark when-let and if-let as obsolete for Emacs 31, and generally there's more of a consensus, and several good reasons, to do that instead of removing if-let* and when-let* - I'd like to go ahead and install a patch marking when-let and if-let as obsolete, unless Michael is keen to be the one to do it as the initiator of the previous effort - enough people want to keep and-let*, but possibly some aspects of its syntax should be removed - I'm retitling the bug to reflect that. -- Sean Whitton From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Oct 22 11:24:32 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Oct 2024 15:24:32 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56926 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t3GkI-0000PS-Ok for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 22 Oct 2024 11:24:32 -0400 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.15.4]:53661) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t3GkF-0000P7-As; Tue, 22 Oct 2024 11:24:28 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=web.de; s=s29768273; t=1729610622; x=1730215422; i=michael_heerdegen@web.de; bh=kJ4NzwaqP0DVHTvk4NXgS+QzRdKxT6YxY1wxf6ZwFVA=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date: Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:cc:content-transfer-encoding: content-type:date:from:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject: to; b=Rp2ZbNiaAXmDFGHOkzA/L9jV5Hn8IcCEI5ZDBe1Aqqsjmm4gsHpYDmPpncMjehzr 1XbvsfYF3NQNRlbych+H9+bwrJAEUcmZGkHSoUqLPjQ8FqZaOBBGTihYHer+F11u7 QaRNGZn8zlbv+3+F+o0hSfdZXqSvveertTftMSfn1PG8kQ4D+j0ICyDV4nosEUIV1 xFh7Y86edrbpy3mCJKctoByUJngh00h1EyRiw9bOI65mfovcBwXZi/cdDC5/haW3x xhBXI2gpNVNeE6LID03yOZ4tKvB00JLS+OMZ5b4vpqi9/jwPRcFlAVt/42+BIffab 1y4PE4sFN1REkZcy3w== X-UI-Sender-Class: 814a7b36-bfc1-4dae-8640-3722d8ec6cd6 Received: from drachen.dragon ([92.75.138.198]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb005 [213.165.67.108]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1M59iy-1t2Anq1W2G-00HLky; Tue, 22 Oct 2024 17:23:42 +0200 From: Michael Heerdegen To: Sean Whitton Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: <87ed48b3er.fsf_-_@melete.silentflame.com> (Sean Whitton's message of "Tue, 22 Oct 2024 22:47:24 +0800") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87ed48b3er.fsf_-_@melete.silentflame.com> Date: Tue, 22 Oct 2024 17:24:39 +0200 Message-ID: <87a5ew5few.fsf@web.de> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:AYdQXmMyroaXOx8t6BWrzkN02Uu6czyqewGQ8bNDkTF0n7VieAa t6C7BQN44gxeMuhIjiS6QdiFV1BV86ySr2kCKEGcSRXEEt/VU49MMM9XKwbxuYRd81asaVm 12pS2kGEMcIuTI6flYHAuOb1h8WxuZ/VyvB6kvo5a8nujzNMKTauEUeQa/xV9ZmYjIIRJtR PrumZMHCwvLu5GfS7WpZg== X-Spam-Flag: NO UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:M5SMsMHAVPg=;bo3ymFeKGqd9CmchiicgaWxixpw S/LuLQHGnYj8JrwDdyGSmXn6Qyb5If7SulF0KsrijStsvhbjHKarKOSF9azmmhJdFilUFWEsj VPbuoOZaZ1dS5Oo+5+X02Ug4fraeJuhuul6D7rwAZYrohotyFcxLBVamh22OgXDSCvykC2WmS dp4d4v+f/ApN2YyrHFACSJrNiyMqt6x5Reor0pVNhJX5upcINexkFVa/LPjITqFRtNmsk2B8f q7OmBd+WXNAq+J7+dazggZ34fEiXAHLumgauqYSTVxeO9BAZRQ7+AjGZ/wMHIOegfsCF1jMTl lvvHKe6I3OD7ooVvfbM6hGTZSBsKLFLBPNykvvrJhZzYnu4j/euc1zZEGPrf70obAar4hFwz7 OfmdqDVkQS+akakmkwZAbxsChCivq8xyQdb8VfvCgDuv9Uxl2tWBYJjYhlmPD8xwkz82LVZsH H6V7j0gdgZrTxrQw2fntr/2Y3IJHkJBbpR0QNrE0pqknWu4QM6gaixIetx3w+xjRwCVFwoslR kqwJYmC5+jrFN2eqZ2a58WGjRAcQcDx57+SLC4o7lbgkM6P3H4dcr5K1c/21tm69a/nn/KSNx gbWVa7IUL9J2rqvVcc6dzH9Ik3SRhAKWK5hz2gHk/wqjT3snnhr8biEj3XabyJbNPLXX4Vy4k fSSZUhyduyZ9y5YOS3uBAgwjCo/9aeJjgGAoGHBKiXsrWUP/7pq6oMQjHb7rsGEyVALFonvtV SjwtPlXx6eCoGOhDLOV5g/jpY6xyxcpPCLyWqdyf0wu/IB1tVOJFw+c08g+8XWRozI1OHu1Ax hsPiYWcIuuiEkxrKUOtfTn2sVTVymgDIbA+v5ZOnHzvB0= X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org, control@debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Kangas , monnier@iro.umontreal.ca X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) Sean Whitton writes: > retitle 73853 Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? > thanks Thanks for the fine summary. > - I'd like to go ahead and install a patch marking when-let and if-let > as obsolete, unless Michael is keen to be the one to do it as the > initiator of the previous effort He is not, feel free to go ahead when there are no objections from others. Michael. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Oct 23 10:07:17 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Oct 2024 14:07:17 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:60329 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t3c17-00066v-6V for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 23 Oct 2024 10:07:17 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-f47.google.com ([209.85.208.47]:47326) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t3c15-00066T-3U for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 23 Oct 2024 10:07:16 -0400 Received: by mail-ed1-f47.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-5c94c4ad9d8so8849414a12.2 for <73853@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 23 Oct 2024 07:06:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1729692340; x=1730297140; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=C98SyE2XA/DNd7XgM9B4iks0OXQvUVVe5ccQr0MzqWA=; b=cji0QkB7FbPTBOHlw5aV1n/4HdUMZf7fAmjb0MwLNxqEiufzWsQ+63X0eUIstdKFoy SiYF2ePGZHQGDh8+bYvLmm5CqtEwFp7mtFqTbM+RlHF/09KQtZibrUXyrRAxsSwsza2d AjK3/KQkxwWA1nYBHdzmeI1NFcwvFNS1JmRHgy1bQ8AsdGc7SKj2wq7EFOt1vr4uuTLf QxHJJeSTv3gqeAhHfWglKfCa9AKs1eRfDMzSsBKjHU77zHNpqxzr4mhUGRic1T5bdUA3 yt8dbotIhlckD5GIVehnBpKEq8AiM56SmVqPQdW6ybvNqSUT2pWetXkWIGCV5iRC27Ns PRQQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1729692340; x=1730297140; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=C98SyE2XA/DNd7XgM9B4iks0OXQvUVVe5ccQr0MzqWA=; b=U++RriYG2dSA4Fv3clJnwvQ2jwcstTj97YONB4g01TSyFJz2Nt4Wo3dsqIsYK4I8B1 tShRf4x221PmMaO6VffS+bm39ll/Sbh1V7B4HB8/mvVh8p21sFidPIdFuFjr3TSLhU1a NBtLlamC287i1O7npWPpO+JK/lOPI6K9N1rTZ2xX+GxavDlroSA/s0J3O0LsSVqGZnP0 2I0NUjQPpg/KJY5PVaRHInviDUFrHCPxc7agGqFYWf/P5YmxSFyQbD7/dQtYYa5B9h2Z d2dGQQ1QBz4/FUKeIsidn1h2ebpR6MoOhMKb/aKjWo0YTZzemf53O2ZSHD9WX++d1oY+ x1KA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCWbVDfIRzr0TpQmVkSnq4tIi3LqtLoz7bYxgquSuaLwm2a46iT3Ss4jKKUXUp7FnaohRWNUBQ==@debbugs.gnu.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YzRF3Y+H1YwPRykd7Z8XsZ5aS4HsTIAfBSH4RU3XQex/WjYzF9z rWtBRpTEfNrU8HAR8cs922r4mP5T/Q8yOSvrDywxUjLuWLd3yp56bGEnuGmNW1SWjA40hIbhz6n nhd+gbS/uHWcNZV89/UXNjWyzDUQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHXs5yRMzTbwA3B+Cpkr7rnsZlrVs1tE1UtwfHEklllIMkRw8sABMmT6epujD1JxkMf+7girYE4Vyk0GdtDJqk= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:2356:b0:5ca:971:badb with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-5cb8ac72172mr2102144a12.9.1729692339614; Wed, 23 Oct 2024 07:05:39 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 753933720722 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Wed, 23 Oct 2024 07:05:39 -0700 From: Stefan Kangas In-Reply-To: <87a5ew5few.fsf@web.de> References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87ed48b3er.fsf_-_@melete.silentflame.com> <87a5ew5few.fsf@web.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 23 Oct 2024 07:05:39 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? To: Michael Heerdegen , Sean Whitton Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, 73853@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Michael Heerdegen writes: > Sean Whitton writes: > >> - I'd like to go ahead and install a patch marking when-let and if-let >> as obsolete, unless Michael is keen to be the one to do it as the >> initiator of the previous effort > > He is not, feel free to go ahead when there are no objections from > others. Sounds good, and thanks in advance. Please also fix any new obsoletion warnings in our code. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Thu Oct 24 04:52:39 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Oct 2024 08:52:40 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33608 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t3taB-0007OG-Ga for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 24 Oct 2024 04:52:39 -0400 Received: from sendmail.purelymail.com ([34.202.193.197]:55918) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t3taA-0007Nx-3W for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 24 Oct 2024 04:52:38 -0400 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=BK0qO9sk9AyLuB9DgWNhGh2+7Fj+D+ycHQkUbbL6vfLUPU0gf9WHmznTpVGCfAqseGVeLNLBufKTsL+rHE3QwjclWBfj8IZoCfEMqiBX7xOaynZLw32yttlGlcRmQ773vJJfWyvY74jsuvB4hJ64R5JU+r/Cxs81GNEdqWItHM0pLkINP8Ne22q+FQYTn6scPLGqXcw1O6dyRxcDOPr/1R/MW/e4abR+Cj++hdQz6eTBmxTT6/jhAgrMIuhXwJ6V0A6IxRBgAj4ZciThGkOoiNHZvBUOBjVn9tTF/V3H+j6whOIZ9SujUgo0tz4pKomYsd4Wrmq+/ce8Nghjkv4pLA==; s=purelymail2; d=spwhitton.name; v=1; bh=eIx6ZZo15ZCj97IDASF5+9BhA6Tl0bHMjod5hqZfPAM=; h=Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date; DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=fQTelD51wTHranLmpxIQmtoPHhxJ1Q9lOSdTp/jKm/2bMJZkY5Il1zZlzH5P5evhBTi9LKq6uOwzJ5Ryj0e1IJMf7N1+JtiT7IdHE+iukvK2WMDNzHQsSewbwlJkTVRptC4yVY4DEJZ4gucJVZxsvid3ZI9iyUBmP0nmCbfRmRKHhvsq8rV+u0UcluN4wpwcVUyh264Qp90zT3QTSyqr8DERek434NECTQ5MeRxJSMPnbGZz1F3ewhDenKMtRj4m9rIFqEgZjM6v6IZW7+l1Fc/ddWwORYu0cL7CnfbwrvcHWNiMtXUDclYYWtTKrpp/YFWKeXBFvc8yu1Nh9auLXQ==; s=purelymail2; d=purelymail.com; v=1; bh=eIx6ZZo15ZCj97IDASF5+9BhA6Tl0bHMjod5hqZfPAM=; h=Feedback-ID:Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date; Feedback-ID: 20115:3760:null:purelymail X-Pm-Original-To: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org Received: by smtp.purelymail.com (Purelymail SMTP) with ESMTPSA id 1582832607; (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384); Thu, 24 Oct 2024 08:52:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: by melete.silentflame.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 43C3D7ED9AB; Thu, 24 Oct 2024 16:51:56 +0800 (CST) From: Sean Whitton To: Stefan Kangas Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: (Stefan Kangas's message of "Wed, 23 Oct 2024 07:05:39 -0700") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87ed48b3er.fsf_-_@melete.silentflame.com> <87a5ew5few.fsf@web.de> Date: Thu, 24 Oct 2024 16:51:56 +0800 Message-ID: <878qud7uj7.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: Michael Heerdegen , monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, 73853@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hello, On Wed 23 Oct 2024 at 07:05am -07, Stefan Kangas wrote: > Michael Heerdegen writes: > >> Sean Whitton writes: >> >>> - I'd like to go ahead and install a patch marking when-let and if-let >>> as obsolete, unless Michael is keen to be the one to do it as the >>> initiator of the previous effort >> >> He is not, feel free to go ahead when there are no objections from >> others. > > Sounds good, and thanks in advance. > > Please also fix any new obsoletion warnings in our code. Done. I will go ahead and update org-mode.git but I have not updated any externally maintained code in emacs.git. I know that sometimes changes get backported from emacs.git to external repos by maintainers, but it doesn't seem ideal to make a large slew of changes they have to backport. Let me know if you don't think that's right. -- Sean Whitton From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Oct 25 08:10:10 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 25 Oct 2024 12:10:10 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37619 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t4J8r-0000YT-SB for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 25 Oct 2024 08:10:10 -0400 Received: from sendmail.purelymail.com ([34.202.193.197]:57288) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t4J8p-0000YB-K4 for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 25 Oct 2024 08:10:08 -0400 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=CZtH9kvH0aZD1qMCYk6qqrHH02N59OgMFGuZyoWiTxvXfLSBeoG3xq7gTEybVzE3cQ0DVSUTmYSLyEAkpjIasNkvQiW6HtoY4ZE5o+ps+4uyvRon65tdlsUGYg5cZaifvMcHFL1vjCkG4eUtTMLaLBQrWNbwF5LlI+oKHbPus4H1H0wuzPjf8/f+zZXX17QXLbZxSv2otiNJwmirNqFFN1SHCKktzw7+POjFGF+U77cgvNY3zzDq26f0SkMDzlyATiduhrT0BNmx1V78p3Hf4XPU7+pwOeR4lU/VrAB4FQrqS2N9LRbdqeqa2G9S51sNIV5QzRtqcAM0YzmKcAo0CA==; s=purelymail2; d=spwhitton.name; v=1; bh=nFuzcjcHEYcfg2Moi4dXSGaXI6XJhy0q2ZHI0joq2mg=; h=Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date; DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=FAb9JBgCVu/I1Flr7NlZBeZ3dwSQ2OV7EQoTk5jqks5Lamz87hEuavxwdNrnkPeaxL21v2/BcyaJ82Af8qcP7n0ujx2GZymNaj8GuKCbqU5nUVCDCkWrdhJTKkKFXAuC/eLKfmWw5vWrVdDrFMewStn++J1Rt77ijf/w+qs0XcDNxnb3LKyvTBMzOhe9ay/zPgPgQ/epwAVAZL5YYNEQOocSYQwxRJcjitdRdBEeZJmMmDzYaKl3bI/xl2n/d+23iVH6apBM05IZ4z0tB+dmNOi/yU0U8EMnIpEz1Q+mJHFDR0CxwN7/fdSOkK0VgCM/sGLwK7CVAJuRznMd14LlDg==; s=purelymail2; d=purelymail.com; v=1; bh=nFuzcjcHEYcfg2Moi4dXSGaXI6XJhy0q2ZHI0joq2mg=; h=Feedback-ID:Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date; Feedback-ID: 20115:3760:null:purelymail X-Pm-Original-To: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org Received: by smtp.purelymail.com (Purelymail SMTP) with ESMTPSA id -1026264425; (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384); Fri, 25 Oct 2024 12:09:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: by melete.silentflame.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id A80D67EACFD; Fri, 25 Oct 2024 20:09:21 +0800 (CST) From: Sean Whitton To: Stefan Kangas Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: <878qud7uj7.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> (Sean Whitton's message of "Thu, 24 Oct 2024 16:51:56 +0800") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87ed48b3er.fsf_-_@melete.silentflame.com> <87a5ew5few.fsf@web.de> <878qud7uj7.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> Date: Fri, 25 Oct 2024 20:09:21 +0800 Message-ID: <87o738s7ta.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: Michael Heerdegen , 73853@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hello, On Thu 24 Oct 2024 at 04:51pm +08, Sean Whitton wrote: > Done. I will go ahead and update org-mode.git but I have not updated > any externally maintained code in emacs.git. I know that sometimes > changes get backported from emacs.git to external repos by maintainers, > but it doesn't seem ideal to make a large slew of changes they have to > backport. Let me know if you don't think that's right. Just to follow up here. - Michael reports he is handling TRAMP in tramp.git and will import here at an appropriate time. - I've sent in a GitHub PR for Transient and requested a release, and an eventual import to emacs.git. - I've written to Ihor about Org-mode, and as I say, I committed a patch to their trunk branch. There are also some uses in the modus themes but we don't compile those, so, it can be left to upstream to fix when they notice it. So, in short, all remaining byte compiler warnings in emacs.git related to this change are tracked somewhere and will get fixed soon. -- Sean Whitton From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Oct 26 15:27:21 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 26 Oct 2024 19:27:21 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:42637 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t4mRV-00062d-Cy for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 26 Oct 2024 15:27:21 -0400 Received: from mail-pf1-f182.google.com ([209.85.210.182]:60786) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t4mRT-00062T-Rw; Sat, 26 Oct 2024 15:27:20 -0400 Received: by mail-pf1-f182.google.com with SMTP id d2e1a72fcca58-71e49ad46b1so2029878b3a.1; Sat, 26 Oct 2024 12:26:45 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1729970745; x=1730575545; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:mime-version:date:message-id:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=OXfvITiyay7u67gMkYalyIMbHBxudsjiU9D1T167qW4=; b=apAq1F3Bx41ZfbJrPkvzK6ToNrtLW9P7vzmcEuC00VuUMpRauXz7QK6vpnXRjt7XZD l0dEDp65P3yIqm9DAKD0dT6fD/lmj3qO6EKac0bI2MetCzzmXrvqqOKHQN2ElgamYnVz CoAdvusdASu92kH/FRrGyXsvf/d/W6b1i+9fd2Bh1Q/gXtBSJ6/XPkyl+ID1rdH1pJG1 MVi+vvrQKm1vrDDKfoC1WQzkzyA75w/xvQiZdc6eHAXQh3UbEEbImX3cAgP0D7Iccxmw DKhtTEsIdS5qoukziu8kXEiR8mpMICmiy+gUMgP7LOUIL0SydXZfZvJWitLYQWmdAy28 K87A== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1729970745; x=1730575545; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:mime-version:date:message-id :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=OXfvITiyay7u67gMkYalyIMbHBxudsjiU9D1T167qW4=; b=xC9K6/QHbRls06Kx9EHaWmnG+3giOmOT6G4wqD5lWjxRLjh8H5vyL6pdA8FX28J8YA fn8fCao+tz6osLZsUC61SRg9k6a5pzdbYCIT6dXpJO/MrZj7u20sSh9shYtU55BFtTWB MY1s0s02I9Lejdt9Utl3pGHK76gyf6AOuxe8u2FEO9aULy/CcK/sxojaG7Q0emR4AcSA OwaMnYrRf3OAjMIOUH+eABZPATE7okKTTL4umvAnIPoUBNJi65/nVQHjvww6UpnM4fr/ YBepgE38Q1WHTfkV6/ZS5wZuEx6UrrmmvilpXai1Fl1XOhM7tQPByNjWwVYb+TpQSl0z 7mfw== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCX1c7/4yqBL50KsvEz3VNrrQR4dPeR3RExxB0K909s6pKu6BEJ9mDqiiNEb4LHgc8A1AhLm4hRo@debbugs.gnu.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yy+zztoiOCzptD7L3u/HsY7f5NLYjtSVb56p88yUZw4fu76lMdi HdLGQhUoXZoZ5/Bz9jaVPMHeYY+qas+Z1O2cS0pPL4kaiFocVyNc X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IG3DwWMjnX9fUEk4w1sbBFvs0Ha73YgNS4+Kn8ZCYH6jFaIt/oIh6D5K8kmB6F24tK+n7uMzw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6a21:58b:b0:1d9:3acd:68ea with SMTP id adf61e73a8af0-1d9a8409c20mr4867929637.25.1729970744736; Sat, 26 Oct 2024 12:25:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from [192.168.1.2] (syn-023-240-098-037.res.spectrum.com. [23.240.98.37]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id d2e1a72fcca58-72057a3a18dsm3032984b3a.184.2024.10.26.12.25.43 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 26 Oct 2024 12:25:44 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: Date: Sat, 26 Oct 2024 12:25:43 -0700 MIME-Version: 1.0 Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? Content-Language: en-US To: Michael Heerdegen , Sean Whitton References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87ed48b3er.fsf_-_@melete.silentflame.com> <87a5ew5few.fsf@web.de> From: Jim Porter In-Reply-To: <87a5ew5few.fsf@web.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: control@debbugs.gnu.org, 73853@debbugs.gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, Stefan Kangas X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) On 10/22/2024 8:24 AM, Michael Heerdegen via Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors wrote: > Sean Whitton writes: > >> retitle 73853 Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? >> thanks > > Thanks for the fine summary. > >> - I'd like to go ahead and install a patch marking when-let and if-let >> as obsolete, unless Michael is keen to be the one to do it as the >> initiator of the previous effort > > He is not, feel free to go ahead when there are no objections from > others. I missed this before this change merged, but I think I'd have preferred to keep 'if-let' and 'when-let' around, and only to obsolete their backward-compatible forms, with the goal of removing that backward-compatibility one day. Then we'd eventually result in 'if-let' and 'when-let' (with their preferred semantics) being the only forms around. It's a minor thing, but I generally read a "*" suffix on a function/macro name to mean "this function is an extension or modification of the non-* form". But if there's no (non-obsolete) non-star form then that breaks down. On the other hand, the way bindings work in 'if-let*' and 'when-let*' are closer to 'let*' than 'let'. I think that's a false friend though, since they're only similar, not actually the same (of course the semantics couldn't be exactly the same or there'd be no reason for 'if-let*' and 'when-let*' to exist). Maybe I'm the odd one out here and everyone else prefers to keep 'if-let*' for the long term, in which case I won't dig my heels in on this issue. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Oct 27 03:10:04 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Oct 2024 07:10:05 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43624 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t4xPY-0005Is-GB for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 03:10:04 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-f46.google.com ([209.85.208.46]:49256) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t4xPW-0005IH-6r for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 03:10:02 -0400 Received: by mail-ed1-f46.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-5c95a962c2bso4178377a12.2 for <73853@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 00:09:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1730012902; x=1730617702; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=YkTejvc/VtI64P8Fd16QyosdN9ktQqyZjryvjM+aDIg=; b=P7VoHScD45DPSEldSQRxvu+sPHosf89MZe6i236aZEJf36MR/qtKujUj3zhU77bX2v uG5Q2XIPxGyGSi6Tyb9n8hlPrw7eelkrNU7d5lugvRZFq4mu9gg9HPKWjkGKdzSFUiKM yZm7CHWCmb2xu6B0n3ORlLbVZEv3/rcimG8EFDtAfS/wIn/FnCyDZy4jbmzmLCHCyQGB Wn+SvtfmLJT9mE4+feJTnndTdgK/NbosYPonfsVOUJxtMd6LPHmElatOlzLcVnOtJGWP Tqp2lTNUyXRvadwoK2rz5b6C19P6QHhY4G2+IbAg0tuuOU7D97rwo86QE10otketM98Y aENQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1730012902; x=1730617702; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=YkTejvc/VtI64P8Fd16QyosdN9ktQqyZjryvjM+aDIg=; b=m0GLXFQWmiWTTeZtIyoutFH0A6i+xXxC/S8z28aNV0IRRoQakDWr3dNKqGbLe1Rt+m 7QC3hKTWIAHBTRX8CzHDq7cW3Do8dGdw6jsmUEAmuQqBGfloOIZhdcy6iMYTKqGcTRlB 9AGLmd/Myj6/IwmXElOb0dbWxB57iLIJ0ZrL6HpHgTWok7lLpe4HoFqYk/sIok1ZZW8g nJPiT0MCUD+AJPLXV4yhuXFQBX19hHlgMZ/FT2E3HB0j7G3sQPuooYQepO0YcH2x1HMZ NEfHjqsX8WGs3g+EIh12Ni7RsxYAEZB6+2vNMJe9JSU8xK8eadgGlFV33Trvk+9Q1TbG DeXg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyPI+adkSkFIKuymVz9HxHLiWI045J7SpsF4z0jPtp0ZIy6iFpA 8aLg3qaxd3l0ODSeINMNOfGzXG9RXHvWvzdDDq77Kc+WlVQKPQzHp3M+p7ekxf/zR40YR3Go+oD 21iAyfvjB9oLoJV2Lk+c2yPUlJ7E= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IHolm4P5uz1CbGR6M5FTW2F8BsPoe9AzOHxOUoAhPwbHf6MxHwIiefqNw1H9c3TuhQEcmcwYmJDGCXI54c+71M= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:35c2:b0:5cb:6869:24b4 with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-5cbbf747355mr3148638a12.0.1730012901451; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 00:08:21 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 753933720722 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 00:08:20 -0700 From: Stefan Kangas In-Reply-To: References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87ed48b3er.fsf_-_@melete.silentflame.com> <87a5ew5few.fsf@web.de> MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2024 00:08:20 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? To: Jim Porter , Michael Heerdegen , Sean Whitton Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Jim Porter writes: > On the other hand, the way bindings work in 'if-let*' and 'when-let*' > are closer to 'let*' than 'let'. I think that's a false friend though, > since they're only similar, not actually the same (of course the > semantics couldn't be exactly the same or there'd be no reason for > 'if-let*' and 'when-let*' to exist). FWIW, this is the argument that convinced me that the `*`-versions are better: bindings are more like in `let` than in `let*`. To my mind, that makes the `*`-naming more self-documenting and clear. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Oct 27 05:15:54 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Oct 2024 09:15:54 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43772 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t4zNK-0002gf-BD for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 05:15:54 -0400 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.15.3]:56407) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t4zNG-0002ei-Pe for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 05:15:53 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=web.de; s=s29768273; t=1730020503; x=1730625303; i=michael_heerdegen@web.de; bh=Lahp7yyRqVKzk6Bo95J8GE9IkvHeqNAE7ad1mJiIGEk=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date: Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:cc:content-transfer-encoding: content-type:date:from:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject: to; b=SmC2oU12/MoRB0w7LIdwuRMsXxyD/3Wy7yAB1YjUf0BJncT2RifsGz12gSi+DmRP SltuCXxXpIdda37WhAKHL+Jo/1eCfQiM2j/QG9FPad7tqrn/qB30QxsbOvGGPzX6R cBs9rqTAFzlpqn/ifcxCnVPSLo+R3uBSs6gw0zE7M3QkBptQOJuNxh3DrfmjfXJ2W xRkKiVBscQvjSw7hbpf5qK1WZtyJ8yP+UPqWAh0Gxt/HvrwyhRjQM+lK1SfY3jnK4 h2r1zneoSQfJddLVnzKi/sQBNwZhWnsXkqeDZ5sNO5GqEfJUP8i5/ZkixPyz2ElwQ bh9ORLb2j569Xn4hUw== X-UI-Sender-Class: 814a7b36-bfc1-4dae-8640-3722d8ec6cd6 Received: from drachen.dragon ([92.75.138.198]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb005 [213.165.67.108]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MxYbN-1tph3n3vCb-010MFe; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 10:15:03 +0100 From: Michael Heerdegen To: Stefan Kangas Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: (Stefan Kangas's message of "Sun, 27 Oct 2024 00:08:20 -0700") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87ed48b3er.fsf_-_@melete.silentflame.com> <87a5ew5few.fsf@web.de> Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2024 10:16:00 +0100 Message-ID: <87msipkisv.fsf@web.de> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:uyR7+137wSwMKQkCcmfStU0lLLI1E5iDgHINAcCzgrf5MzbCxPC 7zmAturEOwm2oGwqTUVQHrZj/0FBjAFmhC/YO2fCpSsvfCfhOCxd02FQmBgbfAdz6n6C8Ni 6eJGYALTLIiT7YLN4eKJ17ndarIOi8aP6HjfY7/i/lKpT4wYWP+m+3tB1fkYFL5oNnxrnrW s/BbtJy0uuf040jIu66oA== X-Spam-Flag: NO UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:9NKKo/kPe+A=;TpR7+RFVfV3m2OIZwmyv9J0LoEv wPlWxWypvl25/8JxQ2Bg099Ea7p137fmorCmPR7Vg9BWIhmBNIkciKcGIOXPisN3Jc3QNagB0 IRkMi3lW+jmr6JJjkRVBXiRKNCrpwRQgRNO8SXvNSskn1jy0WWDmYrXAFE404jUOL5YxgMW2y pAg4d0ilVU3vmFUngWgzHJDSeauPEROOaefUDkEUy9KNX5vf08ic89b98w+89yUQwOdbeZTSg lF0utWPJ8uuRmSBFP1YAflnddPzCoDOPwBgxcLqaJIMFMj7G9CsuahxUWUci/3DZ3lDayx+ED 7dKB/h9bqMEyfb6oq5yrwRTJxL+a9LP40cYHSnrmA8lKDJKW4LMzE9AXj8nN8syatExOC+Iiu 9Lrmeq75McxePhW/prbtwdsCzGveh9Nw9ePpP/KdbnF3oRm5lUNKsbwlL1eugioYnrdFIY/Ka Il+nR8YNgyycVHsq3aseM/BKc+K3ND5yrfNtQqN4Gc1GSrt+GYZuyTdF1X0EIYWT1SCTmAYQc UkAHCcPM380hneOOXyAw07pB+tBJmEj4wcloJLvQZ2VC72/cayC8qOnjWReaQTNseO6TvMt6L Hn6X9gUy6KixqeeLKY41VuNtVZisWYI5TTsFTAPEsXtzAiQj687s5/FnmMf7eTxxnRU5cyzkX Y0wE5IgB/IaWI1cg57nRxI4WyRMawUUMmEdxfywP3ghX6cGxCMd2RhtsjxYy90cbYNgsKOq59 kVloXtIyGHPuDD9Lah9guk+TbAtGD6uh1sfF+9u03F63hofoFPRL7vanAxIYTyk2bi1Z/6mNG vc2Q5ESZC/YBEXLqbmqbKm7g== X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: Jim Porter , 73853@debbugs.gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, Sean Whitton X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) Stefan Kangas writes: > Jim Porter writes: > > > On the other hand, the way bindings work in 'if-let*' and 'when-let*' > > are closer to 'let*' than 'let'. I think that's a false friend though, > > since they're only similar, not actually the same (of course the > > semantics couldn't be exactly the same or there'd be no reason for > > 'if-let*' and 'when-let*' to exist). > > FWIW, this is the argument that convinced me that the `*`-versions are > better: bindings are more like in `let` than in `let*`. To my mind, > that makes the `*`-naming more self-documenting and clear. In the meantime I found out that I am not as decided as I thought: I am actually using both versions in my own code. Valid arguments for either name exist - and it even depends on the case: In this case I prefer the name without star: #+begin_src emacs-lisp (if-let ((a (does-an-a-exist?-then-return-it))) (use a) (do-something-else)) #+end_src Here I prefer the name with star: #+begin_src emacs-lisp (and-let* ((a (an-a-exists)) (b (b-depending-on-a-also-exists))) (test-using a b)) #+end_src Thinking the first example further we could introduce parallel versions and name them `if-let', `when-let' and `and-let'. They would be really analogue to `let' with respect to binding list semantics - compared to the non-parallel counterparts `if-let*' that are what we have now. ATM this idea looks appealing to me as a final goal. Michael. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Oct 27 06:13:49 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Oct 2024 10:13:49 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43856 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t50HN-0005Nr-5L for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 06:13:49 -0400 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.15]:60123) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t50HK-0005Nb-KP for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 06:13:47 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmx.de; s=s31663417; t=1730023980; x=1730628780; i=michael.albinus@gmx.de; bh=PGta/vZ0ok799gvNApcj4cdyhuAQa8G/PWTfW/2FFhs=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date: Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:cc:content-transfer-encoding: content-type:date:from:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject: to; b=JwlU2We5kEUNClkUYeeiEmTYnjM+ZvzdfOWQdly2Z27eQfSxvK3wj1KJ0U6MNGH1 27bor3TwWl56Dgsebb28f/lrUJxrcikJ5oYiHNUq3XxcokX5Apr9IUY0Jx061uTp3 nVMsCQnV7Fh4+Zose2feBQb9fuDZxTTIBJ3Da1Tn9BWFunCfkTqeqzbv/mOQHyP8v ttPQSm7atVrfzPri7+MqHgODZrHNnlQw2dH5v2V2lHtVBLb0S3gs08UKkfltu8JFM uEBLIpB9waKnD2YTT/oBdQyO1aVHoO+thYotx9md9tezrXj4bDmOsQRTXhTV8OAA3 ocYNAH2fhMfdqbythg== X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a Received: from gandalf.gmx.de ([185.89.38.155]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx005 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MAwXr-1tBvD3140X-00Emwf; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 11:13:00 +0100 From: Michael Albinus To: Michael Heerdegen via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: <87msipkisv.fsf@web.de> (Michael Heerdegen via's message of "Sun, 27 Oct 2024 10:16:00 +0100") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87ed48b3er.fsf_-_@melete.silentflame.com> <87a5ew5few.fsf@web.de> <87msipkisv.fsf@web.de> Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2024 11:12:58 +0100 Message-ID: <871q01am6t.fsf@gmx.de> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:h3Li3cEo2zyS7iV+R1+r3bguw3k5PliuINjq7JwCoHIo+sKDuqy u1atH1kusXfCOUxb7Dr2/OIgzV7cseHiIvjN52ZUv0F1qSKGCxZr0nU+2JyHXmcfHcxc130 Hlzh8yHi3EZrncWWZaVJA7J1hwvuzMfn5fZn3333W+4b+vNUr+1aGZnJNttWuiPz8lDP2Zo mp1RRpDz/OzQg/0mytTvw== X-Spam-Flag: NO UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:0mS8oydPBVQ=;ge3PtL7gPi2rZSeIp6US5SIePMM SWr4u3BGFj/fUjcb/WzC9NLjYO9/4lfPgCl34jX2xSrzq8LcOSOb+KyE4F+SdlTA7DsiTvOJx bfscT2BpvuVJy5muK26i2GSqMcAtItrsGdeuMJoZuKL7dotj171WS+K6PILYBcUkd0ops/5w0 HNKPOrkl+QW9YyoOX2Bwnzg1yWdJ48zzfdxL82bp8xRuuhGoeW4f8nYoEuOHNOYea+C987pG7 WKsGLz8fEbBe6h8zH6W91tB8TOu9lZ0qIR31doPGwLoIunQvPvpQpkYPXtIGQIo5V8D7N0TbP vWOGw6btRIobYLh2dCLXj5LT3ug3A3l7bhYBVwphJlfvIsoZPWfjYb2V8mpnVkwGDvsEwdUVm Hhso8Xm4dxsXA1yeznYJy7itqAgJK/KnTFWGLJo3/G2pFXhuu4EHkC1SPEedr/vnxGTZyZjUv sjqmJXcWzs68AvX6OqG63pBQQY1uIqJJI2mTY8P8OV9aziXa1IQhL/qXaYvLodCDYMNna3u4h AkgeEAdyHP1MDutGeOtZI73qEX1AF6GKiRLklAR3tWdZNPeSrrCoa9DwDQZ8Yq/qlUrKtntBk krPLQuHowhwAlEeN2dCVldV5UPryPUAoesOo6J8ssqfVtoOSVKn+seWmKTt9hq/ORo2dRSXsk AgEbE55qRMpL9NsWY3+qQu0ggxKKYYAG3YXrR3lQeJc/L/hN2UNFm1mpU6LNAaI0yY1DRPOON xdLr+6jhpXXGNlLWdhJPm9sTKd9dWFOLxg9jyHV63Y1vBxF55E5rPr2JW05mTl5tzFknyxVrO ZMzPQhkswLzRvTPQkkW5RR8Q== X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org, Jim Porter , Michael Heerdegen , Stefan Kangas , monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, Sean Whitton X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) Michael Heerdegen via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" writes: Hi Michael, > Thinking the first example further we could introduce parallel versions > and name them `if-let', `when-let' and `and-let'. They would be really > analogue to `let' with respect to binding list semantics - compared to > the non-parallel counterparts `if-let*' that are what we have now. Please no more incompatibilities with older Emacsen except when absolutely necessary. It's already hard enough for packages developed outside the Emacs repo. > Michael. Best regards, Michael. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Oct 27 07:24:37 2024 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Oct 2024 11:24:37 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44075 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t51Nt-0000Ux-5U for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 07:24:37 -0400 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:38390) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t51Np-0000Ul-AL for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 07:24:33 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t51NG-0005oQ-5M for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 07:23:58 -0400 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.17.12]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t51NE-00037s-Nz for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 07:23:57 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=web.de; s=s29768273; t=1730028217; x=1730633017; i=michael_heerdegen@web.de; bh=Kao6b3PoCk7nOUrtG593GXbw1Fh9VAryi1EgcT80DWc=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date: Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:cc:content-transfer-encoding: content-type:date:from:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject: to; b=NzC5COzQwQsCEpsbP5W/AYSiXFhqZ+vXI40E5C/nVU9vqb6S+KJHkb+ODs2eICHN 8wUNppclXE11/l9BdmFr3tyEp+0TLboaN2FIcRPBkClhe5eevtdD+bTbbZeIiWCHE y7wjF8ZsdRMHzOh52kZjdDsI4EvKTX8xpButUHAIOkwUeE/wFOLsNxwtCmRVKO5L7 NL5JFjKx7cHNN+osZSqopudHwIOVMbughC07iY18VLsb7FgQGlfo6Fo4UK4X+0H+z XFu05zB02IcHJifMt5v9m+DjqP3QQnICZNEE33VnB2Oc3DGj54qP1g1p85DrjMFVQ i+0K0TVTS03c7qcFTg== X-UI-Sender-Class: 814a7b36-bfc1-4dae-8640-3722d8ec6cd6 Received: from drachen.dragon ([92.75.138.198]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb105 [213.165.67.124]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MxpiO-1tnnmx25OA-012off; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 12:23:37 +0100 From: Michael Heerdegen To: Michael Albinus Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: <871q01am6t.fsf@gmx.de> (Michael Albinus's message of "Sun, 27 Oct 2024 11:12:58 +0100") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87ed48b3er.fsf_-_@melete.silentflame.com> <87a5ew5few.fsf@web.de> <87msipkisv.fsf@web.de> <871q01am6t.fsf@gmx.de> Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2024 12:24:35 +0100 Message-ID: <87ed41kcuk.fsf@web.de> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:s+yR5vKiZ1UK6Qc7qVeF107HWBs8vIYBRZGljojyV1z6OW5HPct yoDJ0HaOM8q+DjQphTbrv6ONJls5dct0mWchiA62incBhghVIQyTB7O0ovwrPdmSuF0c8GW JANp0j6L9jRih/8wxlEHWAv3eRKoCzoU34K0sgKOyr5PbBeu+RcatZldBDHO1dySILSMRAh K6U4M9NwR3hL7MqO6mtnw== X-Spam-Flag: NO UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:ao0A1bOc0Ug=;U3wgXlICUu+iZUxt18jivjYowmW jXZjs+s1eiECje8IzgErxQUOE601TkGaPQSqC4CoxlO7RkanX008SBYaffB7wq3kU9e2MUih+ SOIXDCHwY/VPUTInbKNbzShJvhMkMIQRqXCAM7hbECxpUt5L8ImP7jWl0hGVaCbrB5khqwHtl LwttHQI0apHS0L8+BsGDOgOqj1Sic8UMMEYbtXM9sMGj99b2iRmSIL08ZDBD+eVGb60JMItQ7 yZbYNAg+2SPX91Ml2VGQ+XbAnxrbB3nZjt/P0+EW3etlopG4CGPPj8/21piSRbepmplrNVjAo hSgpuFaRurack9fkZe7TLaiMHxdwkzt9pEeO5n2dDHeZrZawr8ABcAEvvzFQPTXEMl9cRic3D CKbpSSjafzu1zbvuI2f0a71c33vkqiXrHixeRoYIRbp3NBxYcRMhOEV4KUEtDPd18RI4P1mC0 vmbZpC7IK/X3SMERcIzYM8aczKBPgQuvcwboo3GvQ/511KF11PkK6xGtEr7K0ega1w1yHjKJZ MdsJ4aSkWYMEfyuKH1JICAV9U/Wz+5nfMeMDGr/aKamQUmaw7UsRW2jmNcwS22uflFg/VrWar cUHGMZp+79JZ56aa70dAGCDG7MXU0Ne0mGw2wMqWFdNrBNZY57hSviwKDgcPDT1h9FNKpd5Ev XEjtv0jGBYeqpC2Sj6bN85H66CpKjEex/4EVeWXZ/xh+NPDfFDsxNrEZL/WcPu4v84qbBKgAf RdZSBsA0W84fncQRpZ4YJiSsH3ZD+sH7ntNpbXAO98OqBCNV/mq2J/E6EXQVQIHKpzUlUmB+J YG6h3WMPRfCW1ignQ0FC9jLt/C7nL7UPAxJTFSn95p/QU= Received-SPF: pass client-ip=212.227.17.12; envelope-from=michael_heerdegen@web.de; helo=mout.web.de X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: -1.3 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit Cc: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org, Jim Porter , "Michael Heerdegen via Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" , Stefan Kangas , monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, Sean Whitton X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) Michael Albinus writes: > Please no more incompatibilities with older Emacsen except when > absolutely necessary. It's already hard enough for packages developed > outside the Emacs repo. My suggestion is not more incompatible than the current approach. And reintroducing names that we had declared obsolete in a second step is even backwards compatible then. Let's please not get impatient, let's try to find the one solution that we want to keep this time. Else we only postpone the problem into the future, and this is not ideal for packages outside of Emacs either - it's worse, in the long run. Michael. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Oct 27 07:33:47 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Oct 2024 11:33:47 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44088 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t51Wl-0000wZ-Bv for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 07:33:47 -0400 Received: from sendmail.purelymail.com ([34.202.193.197]:45044) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t51Wi-0000wK-Si for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 07:33:46 -0400 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=Y52xu6ZZciOfRGgr9Wg903ufz8EmCckNl15Zbh71POOpPhDRYv3D7+IWsdTC/SrRd//oUWrYZHTrWLMOS/4cL3Bbpuk5IUpaDs60qcd1vJ6JlEC4OJcUuf9KBPqtJQkyuo/RXkukvC9UXwNPdRYNlJWFZDCNDoVzzUGMOa8T5fE1TflCsIkjrFQ6+6CG9YPqq9Tbi8lZgo+SXtYitramyBMRAcn1CimrCKLdqNjesd5mcqiwaYb88rgTUM9D2SMwouNpj/ZKqhXlFOqPeeVC6kBfKvow64H8omzrzEnFGqRBt1iw9dRwOh0CT/FkSBGJnaMbakLB8o8RCvtd1CUC6w==; s=purelymail2; d=spwhitton.name; v=1; bh=YmgfTHigpYpYmX5JUKx4yP4XVeAMGQX6S9H7nvoy15g=; h=Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date; DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=Dv/LRYXtByNgF+ahUGSVXXt4lo0M+tAhCAYN7hgjGrgVtELNQHvtthyOH2u+7CvGMjwjF7WuTrvxUe6u7imEQAFYJuzt6WxR72mzwTILy/kvhfn5f2Lvj9Ry+QrN6wPBX5RfgV79XfwpNx1wS6K35JSvEVw7E/giIgptfvVZRZyZNNkjinAh7OPJwo5su9JmJu/LJ6y3pSv/z2cP+GltE3skGX8zyofne9q16R57QwsPH68A9B5g9n0npobg2Ti0mQhz6qyEZWk1aRmEglhOCzi8DXg9hutp7JR9k6pWNNi+bQxK8kcO6pVUMBS4KkY1WxVCJ7lZOH9keEcPLKnBBQ==; s=purelymail2; d=purelymail.com; v=1; bh=YmgfTHigpYpYmX5JUKx4yP4XVeAMGQX6S9H7nvoy15g=; h=Feedback-ID:Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date; Feedback-ID: 20115:3760:null:purelymail X-Pm-Original-To: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org Received: by smtp.purelymail.com (Purelymail SMTP) with ESMTPSA id -573945943; (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384); Sun, 27 Oct 2024 11:33:01 +0000 (UTC) Received: by melete.silentflame.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id D983B7E1EA4; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 19:32:56 +0800 (CST) From: Sean Whitton To: Michael Heerdegen Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: <87ed41kcuk.fsf@web.de> (Michael Heerdegen's message of "Sun, 27 Oct 2024 12:24:35 +0100") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87ed48b3er.fsf_-_@melete.silentflame.com> <87a5ew5few.fsf@web.de> <87msipkisv.fsf@web.de> <871q01am6t.fsf@gmx.de> <87ed41kcuk.fsf@web.de> Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2024 19:32:56 +0800 Message-ID: <87msiplr13.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: Jim Porter , Michael Albinus , Stefan Kangas , monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, 73853@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hello, On Sun 27 Oct 2024 at 12:24pm +01, Michael Heerdegen wrote: > Michael Albinus writes: > >> Please no more incompatibilities with older Emacsen except when >> absolutely necessary. It's already hard enough for packages developed >> outside the Emacs repo. > > My suggestion is not more incompatible than the current approach. I think it is, unfortunately, because it requires people to do more reading and thinking when updating their code. I find your idea interesting, but also not useful enough for the complexity that it entails -- both transition complexity, and inherent complexity. -- Sean Whitton From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Oct 27 07:45:24 2024 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Oct 2024 11:45:24 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44112 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t51i0-0001Rw-Al for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 07:45:24 -0400 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:44536) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t51hy-0001Rn-Q3 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 07:45:23 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t51hM-0000m6-Dq for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 07:44:45 -0400 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.21]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t51hJ-0005Bj-2G for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 07:44:43 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmx.de; s=s31663417; t=1730029471; x=1730634271; i=michael.albinus@gmx.de; bh=jLJNl7SVeHfILCQncT6e47mY/q0nfmQjU2fxYJqdR34=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date: Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:cc:content-transfer-encoding: content-type:date:from:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject: to; b=O6qjhxlTbPWNoRwoqSQPUdwoZ+00Rnqu7eSNKGmqeHi5HRqVbh5LKso19H0hgAwj 5PCUTk2EhyBAIqtBP/V/T9gdvhzPt+cs2xpdO0WCfPvLmPrBFtGWhfgJ/3e77eE5k XcD0TKiOIq5Opt9VBVYA+DRdhr8bVqDqzF+s423xhqetcKrKUymLSCuRjKOFgFnq3 UsPbGaFGTKvdnRoCv75O6YOlau+53sc/bYXGg04fuItFON/SRIzulpKHayxY7WgGW 7rL7gS9ZKUIVi+RcanrR79wwm3kKlN6l4zlCzddjJsBWkj8hfQzi0TvMKfNcqwL4I /kJLsXdCH53PDp5ASA== X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a Received: from gandalf.gmx.de ([185.89.38.155]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx105 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MLiCu-1tMh6V39HM-00V5BT; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 12:44:31 +0100 From: Michael Albinus To: Michael Heerdegen Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: <87ed41kcuk.fsf@web.de> (Michael Heerdegen's message of "Sun, 27 Oct 2024 12:24:35 +0100") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87ed48b3er.fsf_-_@melete.silentflame.com> <87a5ew5few.fsf@web.de> <87msipkisv.fsf@web.de> <871q01am6t.fsf@gmx.de> <87ed41kcuk.fsf@web.de> Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2024 12:44:28 +0100 Message-ID: <87wmht93dv.fsf@gmx.de> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:8Ms4yzdQB4vOtIerT3XbS4Pj/qZL4HEC8cHu2P+cxqYePNGmHia zBsjOENIZqpXs5vTSYx1RMDfcvX1bXKWRPygR6vHEf+39XYgUBrBN2fGjjfcwk/BzyJNFe7 Qi1N+I3aahWOJc3dhxjU/hwKAPIZ8PFdeV+aj9kU9i2pUdnbB2eah+GrSGHDa7tkkTln6nA AKv1w81hTNcCQSySStwIg== X-Spam-Flag: NO UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:s9iHMEUDoX4=;AX3pcULe8oxLZR2i3GHIv8vHg8L ainCQtyjoTUEQUMtJzuA5nOWdm13Mh+7izqgv+d+3TW1/2qiCivERvBgc1C84IXspKvzDkbHi tMb4qs0o8syoJrrkug8TRiuMlLtFtl8jTh7913SLHzNWRfze4pyjcJOkmn4xIIy+MnNpPLLuY HrYCDmatHSCdz+UHnyKhjPhVBjdxrJeUJRDP+7yEcA4q7eaG/qOhSnuKiJFVoDdh/7E/zQfHD tbmnE+1Q92tu1faouW1dPV+ke6TC38/6DRVojgYg/Cf95bWG3fL9+cp2GEEQVDW/S9A0kpPYr zCyxiJSd4Jl2KW8coX7iuzfOF+yfASHF9UDGWGsmT8ESUMA2VDMs39rcZcjXe1fz+iEKhjVZ8 ZlK3fKxTs4D3OkxXWTSwVkVFKPAIpRpyJnTiZOJsykyeMQwnk+6+xE3R5sphWHWPwa1UrPkvs 6b4/ob7cJmGnMVIh3Qkxt7i3bvC4XXAoxdwV53oj9x3ZY8aWnBUxTEs3PRdfmM9wgDDWG7lqz +TKF22UzLLjskXLIsZuWZajcfD6CB93Xn1vSz97g+HncLBi2psADqxg1uk381W5cR1v6r3tIT 3WGMoonjvWPiHqK1OEwljtOf3NWl0bNtx0UR6FnjlPY4srmfsMC7+Zv2NVH+xAG9q5lF3GjwZ 5oeNjszja2YRX+bFIDS83qBFATPDz23msCtXaPAGCmsBGXtCgNURD8HS9GC6cW3hpApf5yv8A 6yW+hKNVMkjH4T3C8n62ZbvPaSlU7j1cMframgbhHuRWYR1YwHftrXQtqwppCOU0Uc1hswomc tdyf/0GcNVWbA5qAUKmYxagg== Received-SPF: pass client-ip=212.227.17.21; envelope-from=michael.albinus@gmx.de; helo=mout.gmx.net X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: -1.3 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit Cc: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org, Jim Porter , "Michael Heerdegen via Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" , Stefan Kangas , monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, Sean Whitton X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) Michael Heerdegen writes: Hi Michael, > Let's please not get impatient, I'm not impatient, other people are. Blaming (for example) Tramp for the compilation warnings in master. > Michael. Best regards, Michael. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Oct 27 08:28:57 2024 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Oct 2024 12:28:58 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44195 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t52O9-0003VW-EO for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 08:28:57 -0400 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:41638) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t52O5-0003VL-F1 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 08:28:54 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t52NW-0007XM-Ee for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 08:28:18 -0400 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.15.4]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t52NU-0001Pd-V8 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 08:28:18 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=web.de; s=s29768273; t=1730032081; x=1730636881; i=michael_heerdegen@web.de; bh=imBjTssmyLEYOeQNSQ8KtKXKX5R4XxbTeQXLDviWL1Q=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date: Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:cc:content-transfer-encoding: content-type:date:from:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject: to; b=UKdkGwZjkiAY+jPZ/5PXyH2m/vdnL4jlvlG9ofFtduW8/Wq2GJzrCqjw9hL/nG3Q pLdtk/OjlFSQtzfPNswJ4e8cW0RgrBiFuSNPJDtMf4RONXvdHNmaCkFCcARyNweH1 GiJeAQGqHfm47P+0mrercci7ZDcgQF/3Kev42bPeGYGKCFP0SPMd1aEAu9BU7fhZW IIU+If520mI+vwZCAGUmXuMbE186YUoB9o+m6PsXW6tPoUn8XemHoDZuzBInccpai 0A4BVRC4nygpLobRDTohGhb+sFJGHKjMTcxSJw3fJoMoryNC8NgpO7fn3ofVGeTiT lC+iMvfNWnSbjLmOpQ== X-UI-Sender-Class: 814a7b36-bfc1-4dae-8640-3722d8ec6cd6 Received: from drachen.dragon ([92.75.138.198]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb005 [213.165.67.108]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MgAJ8-1tW7WZ2YH8-00jVrJ; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 13:28:01 +0100 From: Michael Heerdegen To: Michael Albinus Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: <87wmht93dv.fsf@gmx.de> (Michael Albinus's message of "Sun, 27 Oct 2024 12:44:28 +0100") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87ed48b3er.fsf_-_@melete.silentflame.com> <87a5ew5few.fsf@web.de> <87msipkisv.fsf@web.de> <871q01am6t.fsf@gmx.de> <87ed41kcuk.fsf@web.de> <87wmht93dv.fsf@gmx.de> Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2024 13:28:57 +0100 Message-ID: <87a5epk9va.fsf@web.de> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:og2NzCMmaFc1LvO2mkv2Cg56Y96r2unLHf7dNlzHhHaQh6fH7Qr IQ153pVpewcS5NnmGPtTcT+eAiFkxPzqernECCNmzyxIyXM0XNmIZMoFCJFGKwIs5L+Msi+ uqgiFiUb1gnuVf/pVaC0DDQbDizlOzAxiZ+LHC1YXEU2zZ5WMSbVvgQBbgsdZPZRp46Yo/f 5sCgRvxLd15Rks4huWtOg== X-Spam-Flag: NO UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:7n6I5nPlQF0=;0N8YZ0tu9PvnRQBn7GBaWhPUN6l cGuASxLc0JMn9RuX1lOpRyjlW2h/dNLvLw//U5EJFC7I84DKm1EK8YRsyW6IlDzSk6IBg4mcG y5Ph1WxkzVXrQlTPvf+oLMxw16xI1di9uExW48FhT33C74n6RrWDsX3lyoBqU0nvoRjcnUWMu EN8Nr1UgckzADTkwZ1qEZBXDcTXPCTmjxELIMVwQpkx+O39GhZh1Avw+n8ZdOAju9gBh6FJlV OEW0j9iUsGPwQTxLqv9MVZhSRaaSpoJSIOFAMvYKvRLFudhXN+ftjqbVF+rOo2PBb0IRv+91O 0TonolfntyR/LW6aVR3Ap68Jueqruku62+j9IWfSrRk716YepEeg7RizZxfP54ZKCMAwjX+oD 6DrVOBJHmZnmDt7GIcB9BVOkXiqdAVpH0VLlAdjjETE3oJ7QEs1FHf6gd0RT7Y8qdLG/maK13 z2aGEOCWPq+25EQZ3M1jYgHQprdAHfNI1vbMpc1VxavpOHBsfealn8Y6/1K32DtPy+We8443I XQsZEC6ansM0kd7ZnNbGRQD4tfKlPoG3OuX32e7KjjnbODfGK9xFcc4xGgkFO3mvJpYY5GpCQ tMUOGxgHMwYIdL4OHxIjAAmVDkbEeqVredfugWNXQtEBkTyGfXCrtOgn7hxQEZnf6gwrFz5GH 1Ze7rzxoAt8nvwOaoAKds9Bp0x+RmEf7BpKst7anpZ+/Pz+wkS3ptcdtg+TYge1wkaeSPwsaw 8lXXNy6EZ6X8voDwTKYWg6ceIYDISkdsFipLVA31GJXnth70lo/j3FHp6Q00POhj4WWybA2iZ Um7FGwjqPwAG1VSXL5RfSF9g== Received-SPF: pass client-ip=212.227.15.4; envelope-from=michael_heerdegen@web.de; helo=mout.web.de X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: -1.3 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit Cc: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org, Jim Porter , "Michael Heerdegen via Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" , Stefan Kangas , monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, Sean Whitton X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) Michael Albinus writes: > I'm not impatient, other people are. Blaming (for example) Tramp for > the compilation warnings in master. If you are not impatient: please explain why you are sure that this will not pop up in, say 18 months, again. Or why it is better to handle this corner issue in 7 steps spread over an quarter of a century. Sorry for the sarcasm, but I miss the weighing up in what you say. Only pointing to annoyances counts but doesn't convince me that one solution is better than the other. Michael. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Oct 27 09:11:13 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Oct 2024 13:11:13 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44255 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t5333-0005UR-AA for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 09:11:13 -0400 Received: from sendmail.purelymail.com ([34.202.193.197]:47098) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t5330-0005U1-56 for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 09:11:11 -0400 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=TSnlCTYC+MOWLoxeg+mm73ECYxiXNMF9mH953iXVraVl8rq3j05Wf0/bsaHYmMsd26ilXPSpZHi1vKuFZfdaFGJY6DBP3jTCOzt13EjpuZxT6bqj2supIE1blYnv/EWhfTOvrSwCG4uXO3BxXCXcLdIZxfdz2ESJ3uHlNVEXB7pxWQ+YOTdLOHUmYL/DqUN355yaTS2yaq9f+USFkkFhix5+RnZ9Vw3V3g0TaUA/P+/MtPJgqOk131+u+mQZ04rTB0yJUaUUg5GBnkejpzi+vWmDOswsXJs+EboBLqr26F50JpYfmn0mTZ7kCnZUrBwrYvLwoJoqbq372ZDRr4VEeg==; s=purelymail2; d=spwhitton.name; v=1; bh=WFxdHxp8d89CCmdwKGOiVbzgx6xpK1H/XlWf72xDsnM=; h=Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date; DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=N/RN9lgvYcL2PxdnYxACg40tn8fON1Yn6wICurMoM9A/I186hWF4CWHO14ZJzsZkiRzDEfJ0I+GM7YJAEIYEE+K6e5hQpUms87ZikEQlNFB9Myp2BNNIaARhV8Q69A6/Aq9XFka7l2mFod9Bqe7hZHqedqQLj9U6m+z6uDkA0j4z7nzGW2GLxfhCYwGRwdpgAZNY7xGyI4wV4FpkYQjwyqtzgyF6X9tWBMANVg3ZzqliMXVsYIzRwMLjbanm6lnOGmEKm6Ck61UA/UGG2RuIOhm1a9mj31BJpOn4Wn5psIAPzowH6dWNOPWAVk/rRFpvlZwOYEirXfKX8mPvSZ7+JQ==; s=purelymail2; d=purelymail.com; v=1; bh=WFxdHxp8d89CCmdwKGOiVbzgx6xpK1H/XlWf72xDsnM=; h=Feedback-ID:Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date; Feedback-ID: 20115:3760:null:purelymail X-Pm-Original-To: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org Received: by smtp.purelymail.com (Purelymail SMTP) with ESMTPSA id 1314489415; (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384); Sun, 27 Oct 2024 13:10:28 +0000 (UTC) Received: by melete.silentflame.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 05CB97EE5EA; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 21:10:23 +0800 (CST) From: Sean Whitton To: Michael Heerdegen Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: <87a5epk9va.fsf@web.de> (Michael Heerdegen's message of "Sun, 27 Oct 2024 13:28:57 +0100") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87ed48b3er.fsf_-_@melete.silentflame.com> <87a5ew5few.fsf@web.de> <87msipkisv.fsf@web.de> <871q01am6t.fsf@gmx.de> <87ed41kcuk.fsf@web.de> <87wmht93dv.fsf@gmx.de> <87a5epk9va.fsf@web.de> Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2024 21:10:22 +0800 Message-ID: <87iktdlmip.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: Jim Porter , Michael Albinus , Stefan Kangas , monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, 73853@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hello, On Sun 27 Oct 2024 at 01:28pm +01, Michael Heerdegen wrote: > Michael Albinus writes: > >> I'm not impatient, other people are. Blaming (for example) Tramp for >> the compilation warnings in master. > > If you are not impatient: please explain why you are sure that this will > not pop up in, say 18 months, again. Or why it is better to handle this > corner issue in 7 steps spread over an quarter of a century. > > Sorry for the sarcasm, but I miss the weighing up in what you say. Only > pointing to annoyances counts but doesn't convince me that one solution > is better than the other. I don't think this is going to come up again -- or, at least, if someone brings it up, it will not require us to take any action, except possibly documentation improvements. I admire your desire to Do It Right, but the Right Thing does not exist in a vacuum -- in particular, it is constrained by what was done before. The right thing here is not to try to reuse these names, because of the particular way in which they were used before. -- Sean Whitton From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Oct 27 09:23:40 2024 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Oct 2024 13:23:40 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44271 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t53F6-00061E-1u for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 09:23:40 -0400 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:35174) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t53F2-00060t-6a for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 09:23:36 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t53ES-0007HQ-Tc for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 09:23:01 -0400 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.19]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t53ER-0006wD-71 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 09:23:00 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmx.de; s=s31663417; t=1730035365; x=1730640165; i=michael.albinus@gmx.de; bh=JfCiP4mpQIRTYcCuaut00caOc6/nvDAEECevGcip8oc=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date: Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:cc:content-transfer-encoding: content-type:date:from:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject: to; b=FFTPBH8o6jMrnkpiKb4q5boI1WVg+8pJkWdIxIwjWb+HPXmOZbNA/Cdpd8QGf82+ JNxcH6KqD+8iMAUhG4dF1id5RrvHg4Z/X6UNDo+Uod8JtRASEdc8b6IbSxks0IGUj b2KyYHFO2CaXJkIVGqVdGkSp2ZPLRLBbJKPagJGeSaL76YDprr3wi41RZaNPYZeig qKEPUYFVJh4I+dYEMElGX8S3I/KOUqXQH0OjZFf8b0fcG6Gsn9r8W/emxtXbRgp7i 2bqYaiMO1cR/MaNB6Np574/xjiCm4efGfBzs/g2z1a/o6GqmiSxlo/8+Zn1qdx94C pTZYoQ6okgX0a4h8lg== X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a Received: from gandalf.gmx.de ([185.89.38.155]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx004 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1M42jK-1t53ED2xLE-005qBk; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 14:22:45 +0100 From: Michael Albinus To: Michael Heerdegen Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: <87a5epk9va.fsf@web.de> (Michael Heerdegen's message of "Sun, 27 Oct 2024 13:28:57 +0100") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87ed48b3er.fsf_-_@melete.silentflame.com> <87a5ew5few.fsf@web.de> <87msipkisv.fsf@web.de> <871q01am6t.fsf@gmx.de> <87ed41kcuk.fsf@web.de> <87wmht93dv.fsf@gmx.de> <87a5epk9va.fsf@web.de> Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2024 14:22:43 +0100 Message-ID: <87o7358yu4.fsf@gmx.de> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:u02MjOc4k/cb/NgOOG1+uYHhNDmr/m1kjTkqTykGTbEi/FmnFrQ BGvTa1YHi0ZNkTVW8V7I4zQXiA+KmdcwTnvLUvOQLZ10T+EKhGmQkl0H+V7J3JRJuwlmWtj S/IUsTDRuOWOR2pb/3nY9aqTOYHAyDAgmY9eKh4No5WbVBlJj2fraDwsIdsPhL3CPoFtQWN JmVG5nUmWDBxjlPM/5kJA== X-Spam-Flag: NO UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:cWonCttWQNY=;7jGHwH8lqg0GEuBP1JJVAFzdSPe j8Mc0QcjqCH8rAV2WGqMEeRsqRELvLE0lBwrlSyM4z9fbYT+bt54ywM5zaGR5iPplvw3rPsVA ddeTtYfkg8w/eNRrt+NTe4ZWVtsTE3+PlQyZSxu9I+9aEV5k8WHDccpoRVP0nK4NA7Pzmdvkn S4TJdsXUpT9YN09bdXXTPX+VwFHdVvus3nfOZmhp8pmEfEZJ7RfaPv6VmRAVrXaW91S/geJzp tdNfyvJAV2JFxQdobxqSuHMzXTumnfggPNomzbhqSuky2TNP3aXGQl5A8OcAdApPOY/Fs3s4S ludNyJ8hfUCVZ19QZur4HUYK6NRASELF9y/HZE2l1jpITxvvYc8//88k+1E9nwwkFhVIe+FO4 +qlpcOI87kvVU9qFZzlGbr6myLrTdtY6HeHLXndU4AJYKptuHWKTIiklEfTh28VJMyb8o4M3L S8vlc/HkhRJuR/zgdPBb5MYN8rwgZOc+SORkL0nhMZam5uGZfgBNeqENIqECBZ7wPE0pveJF3 hxzr8JqlZ7q5kBDEslOQqtZV85cDxR1J5PgLjgNRnjqYv+ZI73H90H3lJguTsH2sdWVdk9BSp MCP9NbvTblkacpeFtAZed4kn/LH5FErFAKrrkLyxGsGu2k9bhZskoVPw7tQuPeO6w5F3BwJgn /KnVGADerPgfvgmGXbdsU+hvdahh4eUVzvUzUlOxiFd4bvC+2aSJ8w4jvwPh+zuEeqm+2fPaG 0tpUosU5zKYjHLWpQS6KlMwLexRnc7B05MGy3JD8iWb4t4p7W2fCl5rODrC0ayAG/F9AB9Tn3 vlpSRhwwXyK/eRlCN5V8lmeQ== Received-SPF: pass client-ip=212.227.15.19; envelope-from=michael.albinus@gmx.de; helo=mout.gmx.net X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: -1.3 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit Cc: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org, Jim Porter , "Michael Heerdegen via Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" , Stefan Kangas , monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, Sean Whitton X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) Michael Heerdegen writes: Hi Michael. >> I'm not impatient, other people are. Blaming (for example) Tramp for >> the compilation warnings in master. > > If you are not impatient: please explain why you are sure that this will > not pop up in, say 18 months, again. Or why it is better to handle this > corner issue in 7 steps spread over an quarter of a century. I don't know whether this happens. But I buy the reasoning, that if-let* and when-let* are closed to let*, given the semantics. > Sorry for the sarcasm, but I miss the weighing up in what you say. Only > pointing to annoyances counts but doesn't convince me that one solution > is better than the other. But you're too late. The whole codebase has been changed already, and this is much more but an annpyance. I don't see a glaring reason to revert this. > Michael. Best regards, Michael. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Oct 27 10:42:02 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Oct 2024 14:42:02 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45900 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t54Sv-0001nA-Fp for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 10:42:01 -0400 Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:23509) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t54Sq-0001ms-Sc for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 10:41:58 -0400 Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2DF654406EF; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 10:41:16 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1730040075; bh=Fg69gBUfcCavqe+aGqZn8StDeYajsah/IIoudpk1JoI=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=kDuqnReGHZnlQq0Kpt6Gh1NqNzE7jHv8wNTzR+o3YNXQG8tYLHamZSF2U0c5LqBP+ HHg8GsG4mNo+7tRcMYfV2qQBI84T1wD8RWXeL2nw1xu5a7u17BuTXUqRUXGPKTgc2Q AzI5S/YW6RUgxeYSwc3DnFNZogIK5nLCUJDTFckS77PI3GT9YXBplOQOD61+lTPdIx WUg9ftv3gqd3kfKGU5uUA5MsJ7v/PZrkc1gKlHnf7KrlsJHCev+FY3mmQXszLPsqa6 hoL/mwSepLehx4wYuaZqA6lX07AR9JyF3F+T9phJH7umXb2caiohCpgLMSL0L306U0 R96bPtNlrcRkA== Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 161414406D2; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 10:41:15 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pastel (69-196-161-60.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.196.161.60]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CC7AA120470; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 10:41:14 -0400 (EDT) From: Stefan Monnier To: Michael Heerdegen Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: <87msipkisv.fsf@web.de> (Michael Heerdegen's message of "Sun, 27 Oct 2024 10:16:00 +0100") Message-ID: References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87ed48b3er.fsf_-_@melete.silentflame.com> <87a5ew5few.fsf@web.de> <87msipkisv.fsf@web.de> Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2024 10:41:13 -0400 User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-SPAM-INFO: Spam detection results: 0 ALL_TRUSTED -1 Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP AWL 0.152 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain DKIM_VALID_EF -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from domain X-SPAM-LEVEL: X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org, Jim Porter , Stefan Kangas , Sean Whitton X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > Thinking the first example further we could introduce parallel versions > and name them `if-let', `when-let' and `and-let'. They would be really > analogue to `let' with respect to binding list semantics - compared to > the non-parallel counterparts `if-let*' that are what we have now. > > ATM this idea looks appealing to me as a final goal. The only natural semantics for something like when-let is the "sequential" bindings of `let*`. The `let` and `letrec` semantics are "unnatural" here, so we should have only the `let*` semantics. The implementation of a `when-let` that has a binding semantics like that of `let` rather than `let*` would have to macroexpand (when-let ((a (fooa)) (b (foob)) ...) (bar)) to something like: (when-let* ((t1 (fooa)) (t2 (foob)) ...) (let ((a t1) (b t2) ...) (bar))) So coders who "simplify" `when-let*` to `when-let` when the * version is not needed, would in reality just pessimize their code. I'll let you guess where I stand w.r.t to naming of `when-let` vs `when-let*`, based on the fact that I originally implemented `dlet` with the semantics of `let*`. =F0=9F=99=82 Stefan From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Oct 27 16:00:52 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Oct 2024 20:00:52 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:46454 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t59RT-00088z-LY for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 16:00:52 -0400 Received: from mx0a-00069f02.pphosted.com ([205.220.165.32]:7116) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t59RR-00087Q-Oy for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 16:00:50 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0246629.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-00069f02.pphosted.com (8.18.1.2/8.18.1.2) with ESMTP id 49RJxNGV029062; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 20:00:13 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to; s= corp-2023-11-20; bh=vzaA1JlHwWvUGw8c7hP3hppM0sCcNZ3dSwSL+ELY9Cg=; b= XCFq5CHJ+0TYGD2bVrGiOT9OpmfJSij0AHOescVEEnaeRkVtXEPJ0xltp/sAZFsq yesix7XyY2qH7LoEJm+KEtBK3C8QKqfP+Rl9swFX0An66zH0VcK12vTA7kx0s6IM UgMEkva2YmrQjV/uJhcxWURNKgQCpuk4+Aaanw4UBWJr67oDOJa4Fb4xXXpFEtxe igAmSGeLmXcIuBHk4W6c3Ljj1KWKJ2cf7cF1Av73l1yvhAcQy94sfosSoyY7pHmC R2aNfbcNufVxRjTIrWKSFjNMtV7jTjSmUjbP3R6QMBIk8TjZaMJugUbWrFJ6LoKy dL4Tf4npTj+IclCRw3kXzQ== Received: from phxpaimrmta01.imrmtpd1.prodappphxaev1.oraclevcn.com (phxpaimrmta01.appoci.oracle.com [138.1.114.2]) by mx0b-00069f02.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 42grgw9h2u-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Sun, 27 Oct 2024 20:00:13 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pps.filterd (phxpaimrmta01.imrmtpd1.prodappphxaev1.oraclevcn.com [127.0.0.1]) by phxpaimrmta01.imrmtpd1.prodappphxaev1.oraclevcn.com (8.18.1.2/8.18.1.2) with ESMTP id 49RHv8HW009727; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 20:00:12 GMT Received: from nam12-bn8-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-bn8nam12lp2177.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.55.177]) by phxpaimrmta01.imrmtpd1.prodappphxaev1.oraclevcn.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 42hn8udvbe-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Sun, 27 Oct 2024 20:00:12 +0000 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector10001; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=YYBfd89y3Pg3wXFTI/OGGSeaZGsLrniVyym2V5dn1Jik042L8o5wJ++Lg6h1hpO90NuxxtgpJmJvbjr14Eb3gZfm5tjDj+YsL1FKtg+NSFw68rTYavF+ZflXx9KJJGfJfID8ax1EsMrf3k4kEKQcSDlrVD88noJaQUOkdm0m/HSmrO+MlP5bu2QmJt5KU9vrVb6Q93d44vVOfnUhg6oZRwKYwvlxS8rArY+fwXGO/m5Ibu9gYdel2Ur8vVtfcI1h0efE5L6k+v39hFqKSehTDKS0Pu8iQmNAMWmtKsA2kyZbZN2ULDBFrpCmtZJsU25WSPkhPmdxpc+nDqaVifB1+g== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector10001; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=vzaA1JlHwWvUGw8c7hP3hppM0sCcNZ3dSwSL+ELY9Cg=; b=tse2jUjaVkJrYrlV8FEs5sQXNi3PTaPLfdCaRA3N5LAmJBjV+5RjxWfDScOC9Frq/An410iHcHf8EWAzbBMvwpUKCVdfo42YxFB9svwFNnIzOJO8NnqifqnXSe12ebM9+dXGc0gA5GOM8pbqUNBSbpYBrxPk0hfZvFIgls4nFeoDdsfQUQgOGXUyctMtBM0auBD1fYmShkksoXDkGl5asv6zSisKfmxZzK5CUqzxZ4qR48EdR3GLi6Mt5gpQIRyilKap1HTxNREwtEZ3uYujZvgFdwJ0n4ljgkZX9/exMG10LjL9XKTBaFd+ZsaBpMwpIu/3qFe0EVHsEV6O0L3fcA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=oracle.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=oracle.com; dkim=pass header.d=oracle.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-oracle-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=vzaA1JlHwWvUGw8c7hP3hppM0sCcNZ3dSwSL+ELY9Cg=; b=FHp48Ki8GYGcInYATtmHgJURuKR4vYZJb2m9vJU1Tt3wuRIWcP7c2NpgCPenROkk++Yb9J+c6rdYg26gNmrqmS5PTD2oSWHHEiu0RzLVjFL+rSvS8adXZMUnGh7dxyPw99xSCIm/PneBc4Ja++bXXjlt4EyAwly0mtdIggK31tc= Received: from DS7PR10MB5232.namprd10.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:3aa::24) by BLAPR10MB4865.namprd10.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:208:334::5) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.8093.25; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 20:00:08 +0000 Received: from DS7PR10MB5232.namprd10.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::8303:658f:14f8:2324]) by DS7PR10MB5232.namprd10.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::8303:658f:14f8:2324%4]) with mapi id 15.20.8093.023; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 20:00:08 +0000 From: Drew Adams To: Michael Heerdegen , Stefan Kangas Subject: RE: [External] : bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? Thread-Topic: [External] : bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? Thread-Index: AQHbKFDWfwY/WTkcU0S3ViZ+jLVaXrKbARBQ Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2024 20:00:08 +0000 Message-ID: References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87ed48b3er.fsf_-_@melete.silentflame.com> <87a5ew5few.fsf@web.de> <87msipkisv.fsf@web.de> In-Reply-To: <87msipkisv.fsf@web.de> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DS7PR10MB5232:EE_|BLAPR10MB4865:EE_ x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 8d917dc2-22cb-4f7e-80e9-08dcf6c1f547 x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-ms-exchange-antispam-relay: 0 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; ARA:13230040|1800799024|376014|366016|38070700018; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: =?us-ascii?Q?kl44Axae9nQ6WKJuIcug37kcDXzR+mHsNPHjZUL28Izz0TnvlDwAWcbYjqsu?= =?us-ascii?Q?QxYE6vuhV1WNg7VDnSGHspOi83Y+Nc+MMuC7GQCku2yRcw5mwGj1bzz7WaAF?= =?us-ascii?Q?MUImN5V3vmN8MHGNCA/JPSmztBIIf0JCyFLFfJ9WVAUkhCBFGmhb2Ot56snw?= =?us-ascii?Q?PagGHEyh+gteMAOeZ6L9wnqWT5k8imvrUZ1/TjTF+vFZVB9is1FxQrVb2Npu?= =?us-ascii?Q?VOBzU6r3CG0itmTNPe3h4af/GiThl5ZEk9LD8MRxEtCVgayWn0iFSx2S6Db/?= =?us-ascii?Q?9EDrCZd4IeSpesJ+02ifrBjSH5hq1wU+rTcIdzElJIK56nqvyfpoHGrxxc8X?= =?us-ascii?Q?35soCL7EflpXaL0AG3v/2sDqnRyU0ey2Z4D/5d+/1+ZSuOJkG8fAE7g+jBK5?= =?us-ascii?Q?QfHwT/UlCEAD0EiH2JOMeaXLx9+bUBUzknW1pPUz/mAs150W+Cd06J3WThcG?= =?us-ascii?Q?atyQTfJxEkv16Q/EpZbU1UgYR/wliMetcMM3H8+gccO38+IQJSFTJisMzM29?= =?us-ascii?Q?anH4/LsnNltrchtNCXIlBhBa0aiyOfl05F5NAA0dRI/addWPo6KA520iLLMz?= =?us-ascii?Q?nATsPOBCTQ3XMSP+GNXj1MVrurtJGKyyqVGW3Wt/afRS1gpoaKUCYZimeyyB?= =?us-ascii?Q?pnVVz3YkW0Rt3q5BQ6hJvWOtWFMVU4+xXosYfPFFEkMdhTzCgQndcic2sZW6?= =?us-ascii?Q?tOJXEISxj3XmHFPD7vF7HzpqdFNzYSUomUmJCvbGzDYernppI0RVDEyfmWOM?= =?us-ascii?Q?9nAsM3yh2OIQlDs5dqPNgvd4PCzJJL2neXUdAa73z/9CtJggxDyZOKRGPTzH?= =?us-ascii?Q?SOzOIVY/3jeZL07aMtpYH9pmV/OpMAltUm9IpFPUwvjDTim0LyvxM+DJxJSN?= =?us-ascii?Q?NFu/HmOJGiOugjLXp26qCqP7R5JWjX00NbmBRsD/U9G0DsEjjY3h/XbZZijQ?= =?us-ascii?Q?zaodG5Bf9V039u2IdE+ASnE4vj05Vn1zD+WE8IvPgXGjTeh49vuF1v588ILU?= =?us-ascii?Q?4NyAoMD3nPQ+whRLL0RYcXF5VNGEyPVvSfMryKp7hQX4cuigv6yBXq9J5ZaO?= =?us-ascii?Q?Iro2nDP7S5EcFQ64AiAdskHaj/ZNk4EuawvX2ZEKFrscJrR3SLys2Lbb7QuX?= =?us-ascii?Q?y7AHt6AcISyz170fNUHPRceDtYrhGxoTfI5zXqGh1Wh07dzF+d9ir8gkq9FR?= =?us-ascii?Q?8Vr101nTi+iCi5xpjtGUP8USJnNd9zKsRApH0dGw52YfYKvwtMZmhO5sFIgY?= =?us-ascii?Q?dnmKC1nfSPj6P4+5wcF05F9m5AvWUAfpqN0x1W8wgIAYFMvu2Ev1HUTHlwsN?= =?us-ascii?Q?H0SjZRAfXuLV85OxP9+WOhP0QOMpvhPsVXtmsSajj/F+qiVWNO5SXbiu7J4n?= =?us-ascii?Q?pbZwD/k=3D?= x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:DS7PR10MB5232.namprd10.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(13230040)(1800799024)(376014)(366016)(38070700018); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata-chunkcount: 1 x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata-0: =?us-ascii?Q?yma2uE0SzAyv9YMI93NEhlax7onez6v56cDZE1Klr+DGRC+KE6bfdArgQmKa?= =?us-ascii?Q?LvYVdarDrKNq/5S/cmZTJ41QehBCd3xvlXaDqYvUGXV9VzD1sQecu/gSuVDm?= =?us-ascii?Q?AafzzdaDLdBIR7/EgXknZmoVr2RKFoNktq2Pc4IgJRNmPSIQOcikRMvg2+ri?= =?us-ascii?Q?Qkae7IgFit+uvaECQ25S0mQmT7T4xYnDtvdyAuOptbaiYCDPwVtl+N4YMvBi?= =?us-ascii?Q?B9TpZHD+p/QBUf3XQk1NID8/OrYRCjZ53X+ziGczY0tQ4ZgFrYwAWNvRz+UZ?= =?us-ascii?Q?2oyVmKr41Pa88uXNvtOwG84JK9bwxdy8TxnazGy5kC2ZR/c8CdVUbSimWx2n?= =?us-ascii?Q?K/obusirQf3JXlcom8agBa1wMUub0AxBg7kCSwMiRtq2Rj+asx1XihTDWXKi?= =?us-ascii?Q?i9YNFz81LzoUhp6hePwsYa4FWCaJLde82mPODhK/gwwINtwr7VfCVzHNkC/Y?= =?us-ascii?Q?M3QPh72wvEHiEnMmkcHPZf/JUL1N4xstYMsXGoSv4PuWGrNrMQL7Jbdm5rAg?= =?us-ascii?Q?chQUTqcWQluf30MwglReGYZ4/QMf+6JFf/5YkudX66XuLzjt248fw4Myniqv?= =?us-ascii?Q?yefNR08cTqF+mOTglWob5kFveURflrliZ2wGfZO6ZctzTyProrkjhN84OY7W?= =?us-ascii?Q?AKqfQcS3WBTJLEG7UV1aZqOj3y+bP6TJcn6KWW0w+8y85eIi9ald77rmmwnR?= =?us-ascii?Q?ZpH3pFL50JisAgpxE6keVMUPv2veL9lSO2s2kCYkMA88LlPC4mwQMIrAkUF3?= =?us-ascii?Q?QHYGTSaKL+wXp4j3SxIS25Td3qQ4MRYv62fiNIkxUYuSczs0MFJJArYr9KQ5?= =?us-ascii?Q?hzQ3HMC8cP4GPx3b2Vphc1G7daQLoebCxBjQ1Y2SHyrBaI5YXHz29AXoTKvF?= =?us-ascii?Q?h+o/zz8efNsWFRbqhKRM2moMbvIGVn2cPbrD0QehWIzVFdPuV001wTdrEr7R?= =?us-ascii?Q?M+mNqenIH4XX/zxhQ9XxW4rpgSc2UmBBPnvvY3rvoX12RFar+uxP7FMWOt4O?= =?us-ascii?Q?Td1W+QBJZc3CX3nErRFlgbYL4DgohkLLBn+Dp0+zNaZ4ZMjwiS+J1vzFoXCG?= =?us-ascii?Q?6aE+eirxD8W87yomn/sXsncBbPOT72oVMKs5lEPTH0rcDSob0TKPxfxLFmqQ?= =?us-ascii?Q?jOZgSiEbxnufXblEQlaGzBGwy77ncCwZ5e+siA274r3mnHvanGbdeplTq/m+?= =?us-ascii?Q?PvupY6ucupWG36S67feXPxIaKgoguou1HMjLYdN3+IXvO8Tvhh861KMy2hna?= =?us-ascii?Q?tUA6xxkhsAxtR1MV05VtQGNMZxsteACYpkmoJgiJ7UhNc9O0YskRy+T80bGZ?= =?us-ascii?Q?8fmHeCw6qQ1TPAbSctjVJNg7oz6DdaRgPtiMnwnK5EJkihFyVcdb7942ocl4?= =?us-ascii?Q?Kg/XoiR2R3PZuO5YXjKNikNlyhpYJiDZoMKjdlCbHXhHyv6xHMj4BQPS+zEa?= =?us-ascii?Q?cxLklV0ZTZD2wPG3Q+m3uex3e/pn3pglWAr25cCyL10R/KYLW/XBbKo1ZlwM?= =?us-ascii?Q?VA17pRV/oE8sU+7k5ITfJ2nvNoWWr2mW9qzQZCMyHag7M/c4rWIInaVwDvIl?= =?us-ascii?Q?HiIbduXXm2ph4YkDl7HRxPWXNhXZFfjf4Tgu4BBu?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-ExternalHop-MessageData-ChunkCount: 1 X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-ExternalHop-MessageData-0: 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 X-OriginatorOrg: oracle.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: DS7PR10MB5232.namprd10.prod.outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 8d917dc2-22cb-4f7e-80e9-08dcf6c1f547 X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 27 Oct 2024 20:00:08.3477 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 4e2c6054-71cb-48f1-bd6c-3a9705aca71b X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: MHj5U5sc77VZarteKtXTdTTbVmJUkW2VxzEtTsmS1mxoFnhnhEpBQAqmCAg0e5rMaE0Z/4f2uZ8x+7yyOtoN7g== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: BLAPR10MB4865 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1051,Hydra:6.0.680,FMLib:17.12.62.30 definitions=2024-10-27_06,2024-10-25_02,2024-09-30_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlxlogscore=696 mlxscore=0 spamscore=0 phishscore=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2409260000 definitions=main-2410270175 X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: GMJnz3321cwWz8g8B2HyODouY7B_d2Kj X-Proofpoint-GUID: GMJnz3321cwWz8g8B2HyODouY7B_d2Kj X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: Jim Porter , Sean Whitton , "73853@debbugs.gnu.org" <73853@debbugs.gnu.org>, "monnier@iro.umontreal.ca" X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) > (if-let ((a (does-an-a-exist?-then-return-it))) > (use a) > (do-something-else)) Is that the same as this? (let ((a (does-an-a-exist?-then-return-it))) (if a (use a) (do-something-else))) > (and-let* ((a (an-a-exists)) > (b (b-depending-on-a-also-exists))) > (test-using a b)) Is that the same as this? (let* ((a (an-a-exists)) (b (b-depending-on-a-also-exists))) (and a b (test-using a b))) or this? (let* ((a (an-a-exists)) (b (and a (b-depending-on-a-also-exists)))) (and b (test-using a b))) or something else? From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Oct 27 22:15:59 2024 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 28 Oct 2024 02:15:59 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48978 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t5FIV-0005si-3n for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 22:15:59 -0400 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:56142) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t5FIT-0005sX-3B for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 22:15:57 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t5FHt-0007FR-65 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 22:15:21 -0400 Received: from ciao.gmane.io ([116.202.254.214]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t5FHq-0000WJ-E0 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 22:15:20 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1t5FHm-000411-DN for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Oct 2024 03:15:14 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org From: Howard Melman Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? Date: Sun, 27 Oct 2024 22:15:07 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87ed48b3er.fsf_-_@melete.silentflame.com> <87a5ew5few.fsf@web.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cancel-Lock: sha1:mL1wx0Vt/up4fn3uw7FsOwwpbeA= Received-SPF: pass client-ip=116.202.254.214; envelope-from=geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; helo=ciao.gmane.io X-Spam_score_int: 3 X-Spam_score: 0.3 X-Spam_bar: / X-Spam_report: (0.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.001, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: -0.1 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.1 (-) Michael Heerdegen writes: > Sean Whitton writes: > >> retitle 73853 Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? >> thanks > > Thanks for the fine summary. > >> - I'd like to go ahead and install a patch marking when-let and if-let >> as obsolete, unless Michael is keen to be the one to do it as the >> initiator of the previous effort > > He is not, feel free to go ahead when there are no objections from > others. I don't know if it's changed since, but in my Emacs 29.1 elisp manual, only the non-starred versions are documented. -- Howard From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Oct 27 23:20:09 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 28 Oct 2024 03:20:09 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49610 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t5GIb-0000iw-57 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 23:20:09 -0400 Received: from sendmail.purelymail.com ([34.202.193.197]:42216) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t5GIZ-0000ig-66 for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Oct 2024 23:20:08 -0400 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=DJYSqmEa9itZr+XxA75UDepW6ydY5KrYOh/h/q1lmJaRd7zvWY3o7NGqG06BYG0+8tP/fc1HJ4hAsje7zGxs1c0V3dC1MxVU5fqk5Gyi+2x9t9sleE9Ky2uklTKWBGsOxnHyjtygjj5z8cd5QmoJp3VMVxnkH2PkU2hQdvSmqlSLuoCLMcyN7CJYlF5aLbjsAnoIg5TUheM/OB4uGY5/17eV01puclA6kUIgB3KYKdIa7qTe55KS1DYpuK1Ru4uY9dzUPTsKUtkzTytQXEpuiuPf/opq8c5Yn7xuC5QG9yFCYM679eW/CKE0iiBNSzGoVkGFhR/YyQAWPVoCgebVxw==; s=purelymail2; d=spwhitton.name; v=1; bh=vjRTx3SmczNDkIaNqhMEk8SkCQtc7gKkAIDQCkbmvpg=; h=Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date; DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=g51kfFmEyZJXx9jwNg3pLob72VO1baYpukMYTyJ5WXTisDWkXQFrWH1z7K+Gm7btfkLXsWLnIKw8BxdwmWqXXc1756PSfUrToxZQagmdw9CAE0bFUTfMRvH6IzL0zuY17YzB1h+i8TCZzIObWuqyZWr9o9gWYB/+xFwsjwAB3BalxBRPahp/v66wD8vkyUbfo4s57toPQfEiBbijwVTOvRfXUNz03kUuANaiSFnw6pv+8MvPCs70QojEutdUWhg8qoEWlF2kLpUujs/d1e5VukMhtFPlBd0AKHgh6QuHSAlzNRbMPIhEp9bGLBMmvPIPoA3hPGO8KP92dD5w6dP/uA==; s=purelymail2; d=purelymail.com; v=1; bh=vjRTx3SmczNDkIaNqhMEk8SkCQtc7gKkAIDQCkbmvpg=; h=Feedback-ID:Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date; Feedback-ID: 20115:3760:null:purelymail X-Pm-Original-To: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org Received: by smtp.purelymail.com (Purelymail SMTP) with ESMTPSA id -606555756; (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384); Mon, 28 Oct 2024 03:19:23 +0000 (UTC) Received: by melete.silentflame.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 536B47EE7D8; Mon, 28 Oct 2024 11:19:21 +0800 (CST) From: Sean Whitton To: Howard Melman Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: (Howard Melman's message of "Sun, 27 Oct 2024 22:15:07 -0400") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87ed48b3er.fsf_-_@melete.silentflame.com> <87a5ew5few.fsf@web.de> Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2024 11:19:21 +0800 Message-ID: <87o734kj7q.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hello, On Sun 27 Oct 2024 at 10:15pm -04, Howard Melman wrote: > Michael Heerdegen writes: > >> Sean Whitton writes: >> >>> retitle 73853 Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? >>> thanks >> >> Thanks for the fine summary. >> >>> - I'd like to go ahead and install a patch marking when-let and if-let >>> as obsolete, unless Michael is keen to be the one to do it as the >>> initiator of the previous effort >> >> He is not, feel free to go ahead when there are no objections from >> others. > > I don't know if it's changed since, but in my Emacs 29.1 > elisp manual, only the non-starred versions are documented. Yes, this is fixed for Emacs 30. -- Sean Whitton From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Oct 28 05:39:14 2024 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 28 Oct 2024 09:39:14 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52553 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t5MDS-0006Jo-0u for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 28 Oct 2024 05:39:14 -0400 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]:39832) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t5MDN-0006Jd-5A for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 28 Oct 2024 05:39:09 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t5MCm-0002m3-Hh for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Oct 2024 05:38:32 -0400 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.15.14]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t5MCl-0001BI-30 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Oct 2024 05:38:32 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=web.de; s=s29768273; t=1730108292; x=1730713092; i=michael_heerdegen@web.de; bh=s13W8pmjC1eXpE33QHw8SQL6dvfI1PLe3eGhsHF56oI=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date: Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:cc:content-transfer-encoding: content-type:date:from:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject: to; b=BP0a7LbrXEmuwaz+s/HG9fF0tr6Ihnk6Nmubzg/JBQonMPH2mw6Sn+KOJAcQzrUn ViJQg8zfdxbGcgna8JGQYe/OM8M+cBf9oZUv2OmRMGmG4MA/XScdxCvfwyMmxHKNU wjiNXXkfOCQgyLAWnW6BfJ7PE8q3sosHaFD6gJ2Ox4s4IQBzmd+M5Yc2wkINsFeXx dkbqVTTZWM7mgCoN6Ta3XRAgmsjDufy8HGPXbrzVf3UK2m8oiyo/YQLnNTGLxH1Jl YFMxG+FELH3h4SemcAlKAhM3ULlz+LFlMAJCoJAnsxYXIjeauM9se9eqnJmNeb73o I3JxWuROI57ux+TX5w== X-UI-Sender-Class: 814a7b36-bfc1-4dae-8640-3722d8ec6cd6 Received: from drachen.dragon ([92.75.138.198]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb005 [213.165.67.108]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1N3ouq-1u53XY3Xd2-00yQY2; Mon, 28 Oct 2024 10:38:12 +0100 From: Michael Heerdegen To: Michael Albinus Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: <87o7358yu4.fsf@gmx.de> (Michael Albinus's message of "Sun, 27 Oct 2024 14:22:43 +0100") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87ed48b3er.fsf_-_@melete.silentflame.com> <87a5ew5few.fsf@web.de> <87msipkisv.fsf@web.de> <871q01am6t.fsf@gmx.de> <87ed41kcuk.fsf@web.de> <87wmht93dv.fsf@gmx.de> <87a5epk9va.fsf@web.de> <87o7358yu4.fsf@gmx.de> Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2024 10:39:11 +0100 Message-ID: <87y128in28.fsf@web.de> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:WeDoYdu2KcO+u5v+MgqXVMXmmwBDugr11IQJZ6YOnTXFtkH4sLI k/84g7fzBG7W5MX5S6Aju7oPBdD1yHHg92Or9+8P6seU/bTyVibGx1FELmNfkGRPSJeB+7+ TWZfxw/7L3Jmh/sHjY1OH8mTjaorMErJS3+fAXLA+mZFvFO4XxMwxP8tmmWdrfz/jsCrLBR BnoaSHPtxt2Grb+4AZUmA== X-Spam-Flag: NO UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:QoOZxlwoul8=;18xeD2lccPkqNyXikoy9Fzyr5a4 fcSfChZ/K9OE6TqPTyTEVpdK5l8WOJXrFX2h4C0+Xs3I56NL82lQ8TQlH2Q/bCckrHsLC6RPj 3gSLPx7BlSG8JqA4yyubJcJIxwqmVk4817B3r1wWX/479nHaVxMfYZDTtA7bhcbrJ12WSEcwp MokVx81s3ybMgbr4UQUCAXUNwOKiwa4DEwd+q5Yp7d4Vz6ZMZjLyjZVzKIsOoU1q3VsOlHd9A Y7lyhObtJSUJ/aT1WUxNwak789/0YLoUD727AZ+SUQzQchMTZmwZQt1hUJo6/QDcCxtm5boBf 7Uu1vJ9ojdyqijzzMu1vcZgwUQ3HZcrkchEb/SRbw0fl80qPJP/qbcKyTGTDHEg1uUSjLGQbD FjYGCUE8E/MkR9hQrvEbqNENDe7WfVE4mYYC7HGpAm6aJQTnIgAyOyUi+2AdnQmNvJnu+fTqf fBJ4o9zGajskbI43kUD0NOeCxv8x/eqx2I7RZqOcBbVOQnTX5biJKdKWjsGhhC3hBAqqSuMRc wKJIL0tdyL9MXEVqnmExvnq0LtNhKCi169RD1IYR22hJwvjjEqmyxH20a9abd8hjwT17UTvM+ lGExXIO1TlkxtgqKeaFQtsZZ5JSIYJGoZPpESBIqM2344u+7GoAsKZjTSHMndgmlrsLmwj+Rc C3Jkhg2Z7ScC023ShR3Odse7SBhS80TIjWc2lbiWdT4fK7LyRUqiYOcSgx/0HpmgBYTyytbZD vOs4dJP3KSsOQAOxB3PpPMPpXHcYxHUt4AOL7Z7YLetrNP8TrFir6bVJu+XOZ5wr39GqTEUxA WOmCjjNaScCGFnr8MziynLqA== Received-SPF: pass client-ip=212.227.15.14; envelope-from=michael_heerdegen@web.de; helo=mout.web.de X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: -1.3 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit Cc: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org, Jim Porter , "Michael Heerdegen via Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" , Stefan Kangas , monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, Sean Whitton X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) Michael Albinus writes: > But you're too late. The whole codebase has been changed already, and > this is much more but an annpyance. I don't see a glaring reason to > revert this. This has never been my intention, Michael. Michael. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Oct 28 09:58:32 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 28 Oct 2024 13:58:32 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54244 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t5QGO-0001uB-Eb for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 28 Oct 2024 09:58:32 -0400 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.17.12]:60309) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t5QGM-0001tx-R9 for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 28 Oct 2024 09:58:31 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=web.de; s=s29768273; t=1730123861; x=1730728661; i=michael_heerdegen@web.de; bh=P6i4u37hIzRcMfZHZx9FY6b5wqJJGKeLK6JLD1M1sGg=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date: Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding:cc: content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:message-id: mime-version:reply-to:subject:to; b=gKNQqO6fGPU81YgdseQAS60z97ynKrAR7a/A4zJTwTeSk2jdkuoN6a7x6RG9cJ+o vpwBZkLAKcc7P5wDwiBItumMpMORnXV2Xk9PaW/naHoowhYlZQ79wDqaQA0M15qcs F7gDXD4b3hFC8Nri43XDyn4Y/PCpyaBu2514ZweCYslJit/CQfIUnU8nRlRv7JTMY tPHknmzybDUbvliETLUkaHBrrfdkcEIMyumyZ4pGHieqVm6nYZqD2l6gflqmp1rGx QaKvCj4XRmcM3msV9AjpLcPyP/lrNMQ7/Ixe2jZaac82WgtgVINIC4J7y5OeZ4XGQ lxnkpmftkuhbfW0jjQ== X-UI-Sender-Class: 814a7b36-bfc1-4dae-8640-3722d8ec6cd6 Received: from drachen.dragon ([92.75.138.198]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb105 [213.165.67.124]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1Mmyr7-1tlOqY00hz-00eLyB; Mon, 28 Oct 2024 14:57:41 +0100 From: Michael Heerdegen To: Stefan Monnier Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Sun, 27 Oct 2024 10:41:13 -0400") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87ed48b3er.fsf_-_@melete.silentflame.com> <87a5ew5few.fsf@web.de> <87msipkisv.fsf@web.de> Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2024 14:58:37 +0100 Message-ID: <87iktcuy5u.fsf@web.de> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:/t+nLiccm9NgNgnxDzPSpgoBiR3snp4Wot0DHBFV9ilgMPmIv0n Xg6KqwxF4RjnsfMSCP1lSdQfmP7cXWjvtvJXAVwswqK+SiO9ARRjlPQfScwT6XJ/LQyAxd6 iHDECkbw+tlWNWpsCb4InDupEVuBdedHKP/mxZ5Kfno8ju/Ej2GtTygnQbKl/Adw6DzQbD8 /4dtQEd9mRdqL57861YuA== X-Spam-Flag: NO UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:c3FTbe9KPvY=;bVton2DSQDbcJ3+tJ0DGKZBKIhf LA6oAqWQ9CnRaR4T3OBVX4uEeKMDrhdgXeXe6TB3wG7Zfwf0jx6EsEXVYYQpvcgDH7hOIS2q7 oeEOCbyIx9A91PO4P5/NWKP0UIS0QUswZAqTJUJXU2qVCxWbW057h+F/OxzgiQyyNRlw2QdII wBj4T6yiRBQvJCQxQ57I3ePKocfkVSa8EWIVKrQipuTCKRqElXpazKlZ4ko/WFWVCBiTHGwym QtS+TNo33o0m9d7Cr74++jWaDo0AEo9mfT9cyueq7/0I1tHF9tVw7ZOwsqPZNcolBBvm46P5v VbnLJafBqKYYDKe4LZs3iljIuOJuIbnuDbSB72Wav7rOkRm2YypSUG9OP7B8Fmk5gpLdcbnIE N2z7TOkYwVOic1o6FN0ryNNwcJbnBgnMuN0Kpd9sUHdR5/mcTPAlJXUauQ1pbT+whuOWBEv0W qpU40gtnB58cTi5TDpprgt7NkUeqBQ0gA/xgvpLQqp7yYGz/uexarMMCELIEAMaZAK1gSlAbF 4Rm/R7ysVz98u6nsQMhjLp7mfCz5xPnmedPRqa7b6RO3Lt26Qtgxz3TxqsPVa8EjhoCVd+v2T P+N4xwULWl4VWQvKwyYMZo7Xlo2DcS/XOkOSVEUNsMWIZ1dWhCWrJundaWYSjjmiSunZITQxQ 2patjRZtNSJzvnZp9kMYsmRXJfVe56dLrtPGBQy+LOkIyWSD0NIUDTtbCXGXK+bqSyriFuTAw PM/rrvbDYRx1oUfsCEhbJefpVFK9RcGgWKlFukCAHZB4cbCkmMC6MULcNmNrnYdvd9/ZBIgWA hKs1exJ3cCHUGb94140G+vE5A6HbNH9vY4XBSdopI57LQ= X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org, Jim Porter , Stefan Kangas , Sean Whitton X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Stefan Monnier writes: > The only natural semantics for something like when-let is the > "sequential" bindings of `let*`. The `let` and `letrec` semantics are > "unnatural" here, so we should have only the `let*` semantics. I do not see an if-let where condition testing return values are referenced in THEN, but conditions are independent and exchangeable, as necessarily unnatural. Even when the implementation: > [...] to something like: > > (when-let* ((t1 (fooa)) > (t2 (foob)) > ...) > (let ((a t1) > (b t2) > ...) > (bar))) would not be as straightforward as for `if-let*'. > So coders who "simplify" `when-let*` to `when-let` when the * version is > not needed, would in reality just pessimize their code. The other side is readability, like for `let' vs. `let*'. In my experience condition not too seldom are independent from each other. I would be able to make that explicit for the human reader. But if all of you guys don't like the idea then ...ok, so it be. > I'll let you guess where I stand w.r.t to naming of `when-let` vs > `when-let*`, based on the fact that I originally implemented `dlet` with > the semantics of `let*`. =F0=9F=99=82 Your timing of mentioning such things still has an epsilon of room for improvement. Michael. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Oct 28 10:32:58 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 28 Oct 2024 14:32:59 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54290 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t5Qni-0003S9-LR for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 28 Oct 2024 10:32:58 -0400 Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:46242) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t5Qng-0003Rt-Lg for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 28 Oct 2024 10:32:57 -0400 Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 6B6CE80964; Mon, 28 Oct 2024 10:32:14 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1730125933; bh=T5lfvyjzbs2dNH/HtuQYAhDAIhlrEv5SoBOq4WQTxx8=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=gD0gUPpqf4Vd0+N9aUlQk9xX8z5SXj+V2IOloULvSp1yi7QO3kYT/C6dDcS256KXZ 1rCeIprMfl6/S/PK2pWgRiDmfKswx/p6lfWj9HQ9wdejsAtqKLVKTUskEVKqKVXNqM 9DSsRKv50bGzXudGTLXKBMhaZcP/LRaj4SZUP3PI8Tyu/bFQHXCBsYHZ0lvRwQcIPi E5cPefYwlTjAwXxBTsaNqAKzqlFGr/oopqQ7udD3RqjaWP5l0fiOHcxMu15v4gOfqd NulN4kE4bKKP/npvE65k0mag9Rlos0i+YfbqUFIJL5eMtR0aSnqw5UXGkjEd7WKOFm guznLyC12y6rQ== Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id AB30580152; Mon, 28 Oct 2024 10:32:13 -0400 (EDT) Received: from pastel (69-196-161-60.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.196.161.60]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6AEB51203D5; Mon, 28 Oct 2024 10:32:13 -0400 (EDT) From: Stefan Monnier To: Michael Heerdegen Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: <87iktcuy5u.fsf@web.de> (Michael Heerdegen's message of "Mon, 28 Oct 2024 14:58:37 +0100") Message-ID: References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87ed48b3er.fsf_-_@melete.silentflame.com> <87a5ew5few.fsf@web.de> <87msipkisv.fsf@web.de> <87iktcuy5u.fsf@web.de> Date: Mon, 28 Oct 2024 10:32:12 -0400 User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-SPAM-INFO: Spam detection results: 0 ALL_TRUSTED -1 Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP AWL 0.039 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain DKIM_VALID_EF -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from domain X-SPAM-LEVEL: X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org, Jim Porter , Stefan Kangas , Sean Whitton X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) >> I'll let you guess where I stand w.r.t to naming of `when-let` vs >> `when-let*`, based on the fact that I originally implemented `dlet` with >> the semantics of `let*`. =F0=9F=99=82 > > Your timing of mentioning such things still has an epsilon of room for > improvement. FWIW, in my ideal world, `let` would have the semantics of the current `let*`, and for those few cases where we do want the "parallel" semantics, we'd have a special `let-parallel` or something. But this is not really an option at this point. For that same reason, while I'd prefer the `when-let` name with the `when-let*` semantics, I think this won't fly. Just as happened with `dlet` it would be changed in due time either by adding a `*` or by changing the semantics. Stefan From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Oct 29 11:22:05 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Oct 2024 15:22:05 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56934 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t5o2m-0008VL-Lw for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 11:22:05 -0400 Received: from mail.hostpark.net ([212.243.197.30]:36840) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t5o2j-0008Uw-LL for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 11:22:03 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.hostpark.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3A1216610 for <73853@debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 16:21:59 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=bernoul.li; h= content-type:content-type:mime-version:message-id:date:date :subject:subject:from:from; s=sel2011a; t=1730215319; bh=tPUyniD /HQM0Xg2ANAQgj9gHpgtFZw+DXUcOZ1W7vf0=; b=fMFYojQnNARYyEyYZP/Mv4f k2DZxsIakSHpz5JxPfNeXM7A9N14123Nsfb+E38sp2A5lXxtnomorTaJHAXJoeiQ 66G5HZAupaRmNGIZZcSHb6T//0fN0qcj7TmO+EK5OfJNpbuBT4EG5Rut/jmfwdy9 3NQXYSOP4V1aDyFq/jiM= X-Virus-Scanned: by Hostpark/NetZone Mailprotection at hostpark.net Received: from mail.hostpark.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail1.hostpark.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10224) with ESMTP id qjyDv9ucNSKm for <73853@debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 16:21:59 +0100 (CET) Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (prime256v1) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail.hostpark.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 5EA9516400 for <73853@debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 16:21:58 +0100 (CET) From: Jonas Bernoulli To: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org Subject: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2024 16:21:57 +0100 Message-ID: <87ed3zndd6.fsf@bernoul.li> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) Hello all, It is very disappointing that you have chosen to deprecate if-let and when-let in such a rushed manner. The same was done and reverted in 2018, and many of the same actors are involved this time around. I am surprised that you would make the same unforced error again. Reading through this and past conversations it is clear that there is no consensus what the ultimate goal is. But as far as I can tell, few, if any, are fully satisfied with the current (30.0.*) situation. There also seems to be agreement that unfortunate mistakes were made in the past, which limits our options now. This could have been prevented if more people (including non-debbugs and non-emacs-devel regulars) were given a chance to think about the problem and time to articulate their concerns and proposals, before facts were created. Or even if the people who did take part in past conversations had spend more time actually talking things through. The same could have been done every time the dissatisfying state of the foo-let forms was brought up again, but instead new facts were rushed at every turn. Without stopping this destructive pattern, you won't be able to fix this mess. My short-term proposal is this: - Revert the depredations and remove the news entry. Even if you later decide to go through with the deprecation after all, the "damage" done by doing, reverting and redoing a few lines is minimal. (Even so, maybe discuss it for a few days before reverting.) This would have the benefit of not needlessly alienating those package authors who currently use foo-let and would like to keep doing so, if the ultimate decision is to not go through with the deprecation after all. - Do NOT revert the changes from using foo-let to using foo-let* in Emacs itself. You might end up deciding to go through with the deprecation after all, in which case it would be unfortunate to switch thousands of lines back and forth. - Re-read past conversations. Think about what *your* ideal solutions would be (think big here). Think about what your best *feasible* solutions would be. Think about what compromises you would be willing to make. Think about what compromises you would *not* willing to make, and articulate why. Think about what others have said, and what compromises they would have to make to satisfy your position and those of others. Try to understand where they are coming from. You do not have to *agree* with their motivations, to appreciate how severe the concessions are, they would have to make to *them*, to agree to your idea of the best feasible solution and your idea of an acceptable compromise. Think in particular about whether achieving your goal/compromise, would require them to roll over and admit defeat. Consider whether sticking to the current (30.0.*) status quo, might after all be the best *compromise* we could possibly reach. - Do not have this conversation just among yourselves. Any change you make here is going to affect *many* packages and their authors and users. Actively involve the affected community. Reach out on several channels, and give people time to think about the problem and share their thoughts. I am talking months here, not weeks or even days. - In addition to thinking about the state you want to reach eventually, also think about the transition process. Should it be done in several steps, and if so, what would the consequences for package authors be? Could it be done in a way that does not force package authors to change their code multiple times? Could a variable similar in spirit to lexical-binding be a viable option? - If you think that this proposal is over the top, try to consider it from the perspective of the maintainers of external packages. Take the history of this whole saga into account. Realize that there are people who have been burned by this before and who will be upset if being forced to change their packages again, maybe in a way they see as a step backward. Even if you decide that those who disagree with you are simply wrong and/or lack good taste, consider whether it is worth alienating people over this. To help kick start an informed decision finding process I have searched the Emacsmirror (a superset of GNU ELPA + NonGNU ELPA + MELPA) for these forms: | grep pattern | hits | |---------------------+------| | "(if-let\( \|$\)" | 1853 | | "(if-let\*" | 422 | | "(when-let\( \|$\)" | 4260 | | "(when-let\*" | 1162 | | "(and-let\*" | 288 | Best regards, Jonas From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Oct 29 12:36:31 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Oct 2024 16:36:31 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57333 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t5pCp-0002J4-1f for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 12:36:31 -0400 Received: from mx0a-00069f02.pphosted.com ([205.220.165.32]:25352) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t5pCm-0002Iy-8r for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 12:36:29 -0400 Received: from pps.filterd (m0333521.ppops.net [127.0.0.1]) by mx0b-00069f02.pphosted.com (8.18.1.2/8.18.1.2) with ESMTP id 49TGaIxP028027; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 16:36:22 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h= content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to; s= corp-2023-11-20; bh=zR8cXFCOdIKdL9mSu7hta21VxzDSP2FKD3+TIhSzMxw=; b= WFZi3y7fqhp0V8pwdPjh7I/7OuW3O2g2vfrkvO/z/Q3siIOSHdaO9a0y/aaJ5P0/ pMbxLrtzwBWkbXA0zsGNNz0lwUNxgkqEQejS9IeIbO2ZaImrmt804J8R91jame0K bIayFsXyM3mHoW5xVznr5aZ0UD7nYV5Eatn1ELRxzo+eQ4qskwAqSSQrSUnis4Hv 2I3AsJoFGDF1N8Mo26//377SsQKoszQn2Q2bMvn19VqO/obEzjWvSMYefiL3i+Uj iomcVi4QN+ccvLSu248BsWcO9Q4Zhc5gS0hgRJXGN9aJUxybipHORuBkEpiZyERF DkewN/TNs1lWAqv3IXIXow== Received: from iadpaimrmta03.imrmtpd1.prodappiadaev1.oraclevcn.com (iadpaimrmta03.appoci.oracle.com [130.35.103.27]) by mx0b-00069f02.pphosted.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 42grdxp1d1-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 29 Oct 2024 16:36:21 +0000 (GMT) Received: from pps.filterd (iadpaimrmta03.imrmtpd1.prodappiadaev1.oraclevcn.com [127.0.0.1]) by iadpaimrmta03.imrmtpd1.prodappiadaev1.oraclevcn.com (8.18.1.2/8.18.1.2) with ESMTP id 49TG0hin008385; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 16:36:20 GMT Received: from nam11-dm6-obe.outbound.protection.outlook.com (mail-dm6nam11lp2175.outbound.protection.outlook.com [104.47.57.175]) by iadpaimrmta03.imrmtpd1.prodappiadaev1.oraclevcn.com (PPS) with ESMTPS id 42hne9wt24-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 29 Oct 2024 16:36:20 +0000 ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector10001; d=microsoft.com; cv=none; b=MT2PZnvNfrdGxtG/fSraMw7dIL2/wBZIIsFTqg8OPdI35BC8kFqnNB/sNRym0veTGpt+cFaLMnMN6wbtuGCCOcUV5/kUwLxvqslZ7QNCwYhlMjun4LVbvNWQCxegDFTIxhdVqsLdQknM7DHBMBrPsKmhOLMC+UVE1LgXOX7KIHgp1gcxr0zTD83a5QK1W7S3yd5sWbf8RkDutBryQTbE62ixjUmxRd9n9ReANG7RrzMkDGEN0CN9gJzKPIRenjeos64KiegnMHpCRQ3/mzcnL1kstR9nbSdb4gxhS+aAM7xBRncRI+WSC+t0y5ibOdMTCFRmeL6TsZS3FYh+coVtxQ== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector10001; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1; bh=zR8cXFCOdIKdL9mSu7hta21VxzDSP2FKD3+TIhSzMxw=; b=qqgDGOV8IXKKm7Onb2FdoaVRrFRfH0tdFaAR4mWaUVj2P6u31K5MvB0gn2+NfDENO/xBzWG9vDu8JnEsSFuEFXlgcJSugqozMDD0eY4ZJqjfhba3/KWqJiP2ly2KPybN44hgU3g1AXSGrdIevyFIvuWiAv0me+oBN3M0BLDB/FcCnAn3YehtTkKSTnIDXM7FDxxuCB4VEN23DPlY4Du3gufLEYXa5TysClK78SLLiYa6alV8Ks8mOvrNzDQ7oNLi4VcI1bsv3DbmFwKvywh8Wjkm/beKzMy2lAu01GZCDizld4Z9F+KExRHQmBlIgahUPfqZyyyOyrsSw/Y8vywWsw== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=oracle.com; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=oracle.com; dkim=pass header.d=oracle.com; arc=none DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.onmicrosoft.com; s=selector2-oracle-onmicrosoft-com; h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-SenderADCheck; bh=zR8cXFCOdIKdL9mSu7hta21VxzDSP2FKD3+TIhSzMxw=; b=DGGorMv/vjvj/5l8hgOZXO4UJftn+YMk+wHOFzBtLa06ITSkbajmz0I+vs9nskCUznB7tTx8SlI6HC7QwxTrUqxiVZ5pac+N2Snqt8TWQzWMg1DIkXxFZaJASQ7gqEYspIym6XWFuwwmewPt2/Kv0B6Vru9Jb+j9Da4VUAzYNkg= Received: from DS7PR10MB5232.namprd10.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:5:3aa::24) by CY8PR10MB6756.namprd10.prod.outlook.com (2603:10b6:930:97::6) with Microsoft SMTP Server (version=TLS1_2, cipher=TLS_ECDHE_RSA_WITH_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) id 15.20.8093.25; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 16:36:17 +0000 Received: from DS7PR10MB5232.namprd10.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::8303:658f:14f8:2324]) by DS7PR10MB5232.namprd10.prod.outlook.com ([fe80::8303:658f:14f8:2324%4]) with mapi id 15.20.8093.023; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 16:36:17 +0000 From: Drew Adams To: Jonas Bernoulli , "73853@debbugs.gnu.org" <73853@debbugs.gnu.org> Subject: RE: [External] : bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? Thread-Topic: [External] : bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? Thread-Index: AQHbKhaM3s+hju4FREWJSCHBEir7GbKd65Yg Date: Tue, 29 Oct 2024 16:36:17 +0000 Message-ID: References: <87ed3zndd6.fsf@bernoul.li> In-Reply-To: <87ed3zndd6.fsf@bernoul.li> Accept-Language: en-US Content-Language: en-US X-MS-Has-Attach: X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: x-ms-publictraffictype: Email x-ms-traffictypediagnostic: DS7PR10MB5232:EE_|CY8PR10MB6756:EE_ x-ms-office365-filtering-correlation-id: 3775c58f-81e0-48f9-ff00-08dcf837d01b x-ms-exchange-senderadcheck: 1 x-ms-exchange-antispam-relay: 0 x-microsoft-antispam: BCL:0; ARA:13230040|376014|366016|1800799024|38070700018; x-microsoft-antispam-message-info: =?us-ascii?Q?4jYeAyi3MMEkEgz9bEKLw3s6WDqELOvz7GXh9OB9xx4rup7R74IJfxjhl5pW?= =?us-ascii?Q?lp65g7RnsS2HsCK1m+7HU7t9065Z8VzvTvcaxFWzgi7BMeurMeevpZCJfvUI?= =?us-ascii?Q?elnwv5o0YNQdFvbUmTlJq2sZ05kMT/U+lKkUEOS7Ra9ubo6pRpnjb7uveZwc?= =?us-ascii?Q?T4xAaw727yMzVZE3AKTrm6YYunLgwWxb60r5aIs2qEurgLKGEdp3sQ5ngX/8?= =?us-ascii?Q?0HC7qDXdUNS3rnocs8ZlI+J9F+LwWSiwDMa+4zxWt+U+x6E5zBfvyizqSteW?= =?us-ascii?Q?zNg/Ge5I4qat5bDYbs5I4Niru2a5iQKNKSjCBBFtpHnqQPmSj1/8Ml9pxcyo?= =?us-ascii?Q?PF81KZHYNjFI0GMHi3Cx4GZ9sBaZk6Mg4hiQxdXvxgLUcRL4OiF1fw+s4W4V?= =?us-ascii?Q?BkidGZwT59cZllJstQjKpKGkIolKR5FdtwLJ2wy5/Ag71DAjQnpV70lLK1Ze?= =?us-ascii?Q?xhg5+YgCXx3GQ506yYufa5Ff8aMPw9tcpxZXeZEAOUlrq+cvj1Nwk0nSz2is?= =?us-ascii?Q?7Ct8BLUaEg7E15DCicFt4xoHtvXKR6gxqqZWjv7ewyJ5XT/AlQvWQSjcfIq6?= =?us-ascii?Q?2TgOgCnYeonfxKEEtV65WeRO9dVPhyDkpzoPnQLM0a5SvsYkUp2g5cWx9YoX?= =?us-ascii?Q?N71wJTl5Hp/JkQq7lIm/auypoKzfvZqGgKb4056zNJ+yZlEp7Ob6wDM0RWkn?= =?us-ascii?Q?byaU/qZy2H+gJU/uZDE1ZLOpqvmFIsnkIQKytoQcnJw7FOLMIrZECavB3leP?= =?us-ascii?Q?okNR6rNT3S4GKE08+w9wkiAjh4+JU7uBw3HdUA3+kF7+sbxqgogpa1z40rtD?= =?us-ascii?Q?a3JAt9yt+QgRW2FuJ2du20ywFlTNB6vnFkNIr9z2a8oj++pWmE8AVxam0iX6?= =?us-ascii?Q?CfzdfXI9l874r0QLwAXp0LJAGkaYD42s1845ouWO0s2tkwXr9+ORuwACWTr0?= =?us-ascii?Q?wAUPHOwnwQGQZpeRrJ+50W9nZyJelivY4Q8Vcxg4Y6VabNIqUmVlHwnAK14D?= =?us-ascii?Q?PzxK48YODn2TMIZVXAymvZd9e/B4wCAWZFF/2iD+m8qdofZocVA32faXVqWB?= =?us-ascii?Q?m9Schld9ISWI60XF8FaqS6GPE9mLUvGoAP7UHiYpK70e7cfR4jMdBLVYGxSL?= =?us-ascii?Q?ghSb/jDsGTtnT1JOy3E0Q1MZZkM30jw9D95VdN5M6AsQWSXcMLSddxP4DdoU?= =?us-ascii?Q?TLl9Yp1bFiqcDZA1N0pfJALA+v6RsgrOCe01GXuugm0/Wn72RRqn2+D277dR?= =?us-ascii?Q?A7tVw21xo477bKLlqNFOjMvfkkHowflc8OUs0zuJ+nwm2eQcgezN67NPVR4x?= =?us-ascii?Q?tPR4iOSZh31xsVzvZChzKbym2Jn+V9LoI4nQZETaXfgItYS+VR/9xIl3QLyT?= =?us-ascii?Q?nZj4PJA=3D?= x-forefront-antispam-report: CIP:255.255.255.255; CTRY:; LANG:en; SCL:1; SRV:; IPV:NLI; SFV:NSPM; H:DS7PR10MB5232.namprd10.prod.outlook.com; PTR:; CAT:NONE; SFS:(13230040)(376014)(366016)(1800799024)(38070700018); DIR:OUT; SFP:1101; x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata-chunkcount: 1 x-ms-exchange-antispam-messagedata-0: =?us-ascii?Q?X2ZjVrXfSJgLrG+qYgNdPljdKKDKTUvDV1BJo1uB75QECAYTDoU6GOypXBR4?= =?us-ascii?Q?GOO4+FdO7VkeY9c8zGEL9SUCHcl8+uM8LAltibsKwYYzjRbdDeQqIstXkla9?= =?us-ascii?Q?q/yDxVGL07U0+gpqW+3rfBJL8kMdWsLipLTaZvjk7Af2LZSB25MiAVLwYND8?= =?us-ascii?Q?Kpe+Rm9rT+oOmhtK3QTuBqplrqpq3hwDKf/quqEh6O1ZN53zZfv/GCkximfZ?= =?us-ascii?Q?oOdf+frdC+nb8YZ3tybxlA8btPHv1uIhOpdoFM8SM62BiAJSgx39zcxYwqnW?= =?us-ascii?Q?NKDqQwmOVnTBNzGNHr4QSbrbDHziw4wNE6uR7UH4ljCzcYf5ZL7llOJD2oqa?= =?us-ascii?Q?AScYt3kEagcmHoKINWYFocIyQTfmK/TG57g5ttktONBa18UY2F51rxKlwBtH?= =?us-ascii?Q?MD0JtXht6H3U//cwjvUP+FNNuKjIWiEh1tI+F7cHJLJH7xvEGs6iUaV3UMgj?= =?us-ascii?Q?OoStMJ3lMcNkJyWNdCc2ctfW81l2OY/o2QnH2wKNqwnUOF2d9DJssuRAkgeQ?= =?us-ascii?Q?n4xVHMQWPYzCrD/POM0cI79GlhMFh6r1y6HGcgcItexqFlc2wdPwSsdf+Rep?= =?us-ascii?Q?vVgLvZ4wwKo31zlSqIvadewL1ou0S+oyHhzV4/P1MRbh5NB0AGMVMyQWAFZq?= =?us-ascii?Q?PTKNaffpDEyxKZcRXRRFtH4nGr1VCeVQRwdKh+IXsAF8tTlfdRjEeCMaOzp3?= =?us-ascii?Q?4um3gd77EDLB78elfJbDDlC+u1g094yR+rzaJY8QUjbgTh+B0PMRVe2vERGG?= =?us-ascii?Q?/qGXbr1v7enDSkGgw9i7dNyV6S673e0jmeRyIErST8s4noVWXky45Ipg1iWm?= =?us-ascii?Q?G8eGumJfUIamQHLQZQfXIDuuRBU4iPRzwBSf5mF3KQWzN0aC64u+x3ANvckF?= =?us-ascii?Q?CFVoMEUYO6+R8Yuyj4cdBYh4vVxzFmAueqIAhCoae0CUQrAs32h+rde1Uh0Y?= =?us-ascii?Q?luzleh3vIsEqIgSk6ifIZFYbw1b7LIiuhybCTreeRAyiwaEVjYi25h6j25Zy?= =?us-ascii?Q?X7RP+N3sBMe+1WsF/1a7ylJVCkc4vP/hbBY2sKbCCIuey5A9D/EVPwFIuM/j?= =?us-ascii?Q?k2/v4xM4AQin6OG37aIf1h4Ma/GpkwPl7epgB1otuhDWxHIWx7Fi5WEcwJcv?= =?us-ascii?Q?/bJv1RqGOgrZN1ZvR0uxXyYpWjPVzg1ZNGr+w8BmdYhP2MHnZ5zOml7Qf3S1?= =?us-ascii?Q?RXCIGtsNuJZ3B6NXySuo1xMZcVgGUU+YNqGZgZHGIvBHd0ipdI8oh53ew/TG?= =?us-ascii?Q?ft58IycSGwtb2V29mclKPbCtoBIJSZY2cZfFWDwN9nL0ejp/MuVu6U925EdV?= =?us-ascii?Q?S7t0RBM9JKGgu8jbvd37zLWHYA97LTuT960C5CE7+WnSsCTzCBYkSSrlZbKU?= =?us-ascii?Q?6KPts1GDq5lm6QInZnuUIz8/LgGwRQfM2OdXaS55QS+5YQJKKRAq/o8wU9tG?= =?us-ascii?Q?BAU9epsmZPVylmcVKP6m+cXqkWV1wL/6zspL//RElMNHDH7E+mDJ2+lRJBkL?= =?us-ascii?Q?Xdi/j1oyCXsE99HjsEhbwObEw7Vb53ypaJ8P782Ji/do7UZitoJA0ZOHW9S0?= =?us-ascii?Q?a3IbXv5dJpRy0kbZd8vpZ1MKV1ezip6QyGRmFgbw?= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-ExternalHop-MessageData-ChunkCount: 1 X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-ExternalHop-MessageData-0: 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 X-OriginatorOrg: oracle.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthAs: Internal X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-AuthSource: DS7PR10MB5232.namprd10.prod.outlook.com X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-Network-Message-Id: 3775c58f-81e0-48f9-ff00-08dcf837d01b X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-originalarrivaltime: 29 Oct 2024 16:36:17.8069 (UTC) X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-fromentityheader: Hosted X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-id: 4e2c6054-71cb-48f1-bd6c-3a9705aca71b X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-mailboxtype: HOSTED X-MS-Exchange-CrossTenant-userprincipalname: Jz/MmvH0t6+fcvb1RT5vnz0G+4OOi+N6EqUHdLJXbV6WWrWovXvQ5W/Zyrgo3aJjUfWTTTwzDPQjKZen2FiuMA== X-MS-Exchange-Transport-CrossTenantHeadersStamped: CY8PR10MB6756 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=baseguard engine=ICAP:2.0.293,Aquarius:18.0.1051,Hydra:6.0.680,FMLib:17.12.62.30 definitions=2024-10-29_12,2024-10-29_01,2024-09-30_01 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 mlxscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxlogscore=825 malwarescore=0 adultscore=0 phishscore=0 suspectscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.12.0-2409260000 definitions=main-2410290127 X-Proofpoint-GUID: XC8IZPWq1yx35ECYIzREBMgMpuHe__iI X-Proofpoint-ORIG-GUID: XC8IZPWq1yx35ECYIzREBMgMpuHe__iI X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) FWIW, +1. ___ I don't understand why language-design discussions, even major ones sometimes, are carried out in debbugs and not always in emacs-devel@gnu.org. I can understand that some real BUG discussion can diverge or expand to a design discussion, but even then I'd think that that design discussion should be gently moved to emacs-devel. Some such discussions could even benefit from a mention in other places, such as help-gnu-emacs, so more users could tune in to the discussion in emacs-devel if they're interested. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Oct 29 20:50:15 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Oct 2024 00:50:16 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59992 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t5wud-0001mn-F9 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 20:50:15 -0400 Received: from sendmail.purelymail.com ([34.202.193.197]:50296) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t5wua-0001k3-Tz for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 29 Oct 2024 20:50:13 -0400 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=kZfZOSDykWfJykfnz8I+gGi4eiZjdKJfZwS3675Oqbh59nCli/cb0CeievC4ZyGFYhBrAz/U6QAPFSDS4Bt5K/Ixu/k+zV09gj+XW2SiS6Gyq0+MkvLxEWQWxeR0YOboRKFh/wH1XA5EfZQ/Cr7Uc67i5mUosMEmozurmXq7zSpFiYdVcd1eVsJxw+v4ZoomrcWvxdbYsJEiP2iK89EBRtp5WEI5OO7pBLnYBYBgaLwBPgjrZh/EVmZFkQqBQwJitxowC1BpNagFH7wdY7eEwHyEbfuqpFTzK5USdsxVh03l0I6zQK/hOgFanfuksci30Ym5fnU/p/GueJ11nZ5X7g==; s=purelymail3; d=spwhitton.name; v=1; bh=6i/8HxgwsnjLjMuSPagGYrRcjUB1mc9rup7X68ozF1k=; h=Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date; DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=GUKujrsVJ8bhm5psxY/bMaMQU5A+vIfy9TdiqY7C6dTWus8iAYHEDE06rSTWLY0oC9nsuwGbqLVBCFx5PwPqLazkUku90gC0CT+t5udiYq60r/rdxOkQzwpniFXHDPXRGdhDRVnRwbv0b8U1D08gXYcScoOaHFIXxNKVX79xnnHUhTS4uNwkYewEUg+3Il/aieD01BO6rYW69NwkKh1XiO5DEtVGL1xEH2dwumtio13vck/zEmSDSpCcoJXbXJv74VtOf2XO+qGB5MYIUiDADbu6i9de/9UMDutWCuubJu3O0c1RK+Tgz0URECmLBhiXUOrnhr8tc50pduOJV7e5Mg==; s=purelymail3; d=purelymail.com; v=1; bh=6i/8HxgwsnjLjMuSPagGYrRcjUB1mc9rup7X68ozF1k=; h=Feedback-ID:Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date; Feedback-ID: 20115:3760:null:purelymail X-Pm-Original-To: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org Received: by smtp.purelymail.com (Purelymail SMTP) with ESMTPSA id 1007134240; (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384); Wed, 30 Oct 2024 00:50:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: by melete.silentflame.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id F1C777EEAC1; Wed, 30 Oct 2024 08:49:57 +0800 (CST) From: Sean Whitton To: Jonas Bernoulli , 73853@debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: <87ed3zndd6.fsf@bernoul.li> (Jonas Bernoulli's message of "Tue, 29 Oct 2024 16:21:57 +0100") References: <87ed3zndd6.fsf@bernoul.li> Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2024 08:49:57 +0800 Message-ID: <871pzye7nu.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hello, I think that you are overstating the level of disagreement. A lot of the discussions we have been having have been academic. We all agree that the legacy single binding syntax should be removed (I noticed that you didn't use that syntax anywhere in transient.el, when I updated it). The only question then is how exactly to deprecate that syntax. There is not complete agreement on the method of deprecation. But there never was going to be: it was a case where a head maintainer just had to make a choice about it, as Stefan did. Those who disagree are often tempted to say that there should have been more discussion. But it is reasonable to think about whether it is likely that further discussion would yield additional truth. I think it was clear to us here that, in this case, it would not. And indeed, instead of pointing out some critical point that you think we missed concerning this deprecation, in your message you instead wrote about highly abstract issues in design. The specific reason this change had to be backed out before has been addressed, in the interim. It was the time to do this. -- Sean Whitton From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Oct 30 05:42:16 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Oct 2024 09:42:16 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34329 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t65DT-0002Lc-Vd for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 30 Oct 2024 05:42:16 -0400 Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.15]:49961) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t65DR-0002LU-8W for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 30 Oct 2024 05:42:14 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmx.de; s=s31663417; t=1730281325; x=1730886125; i=michael.albinus@gmx.de; bh=ENYOOGGAPsuESMn9EC7GCNsMXyQ0bU4EAWxbxJGe1gk=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date: Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:cc:content-transfer-encoding: content-type:date:from:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject: to; b=QZQyMVVGMV9mTvrt8LvXsKuYNQJlBZCgAaBGANWQovoF6iiWlwzhR7ioAYoy4keB /lR4bqzj/rEZJOo5C/TAL5H623tegkJyWtSmo37DJsZlBTQS6Mo4ClFKsUE6TLzcX ve/1gFc7bCDAX7oKF2WuB2/p5lMIXRabfIxV9MHGGQ9qwLlXrTCN2rAxz7eWK/4dc 3po9hq6lBQcLdM8t0/1BGAH93hBPcFR5QU1w5MnZignc0aJJ8fmdonpFHpmzA4BLi pLlWnUx2n0acwzX/RrINRHJNPDy9SPIjN7B46CqxbY+xVDiIL0PG8sP6SOuyEyG76 TOzNJ0+TLz/adQsG0Q== X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a Received: from gandalf.gmx.de ([185.89.38.155]) by mail.gmx.net (mrgmx005 [212.227.17.190]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1Mzhj9-1u0mRI0SMD-00uQhc; Wed, 30 Oct 2024 10:42:05 +0100 From: Michael Albinus To: Sean Whitton Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: <87o738s7ta.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> (Sean Whitton's message of "Fri, 25 Oct 2024 20:09:21 +0800") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87ed48b3er.fsf_-_@melete.silentflame.com> <87a5ew5few.fsf@web.de> <878qud7uj7.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87o738s7ta.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2024 10:42:03 +0100 Message-ID: <87wmhq3p1w.fsf@gmx.de> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:anGYChQ6uTimwaKjY3H2cXQ/mO7fTScF0T7OejQa7Fr7CH3X4DU i2nb9uFEGU7J3srfX0fzooSHfPRn9Rq6LFWVk+t7udcHjRKqOTr2hEBlWEXDzhbrvXbGpI3 QRK0ZaW3Ke5S2sENMDgi/QUNVXZWTlOtzglZ/TbRWctYBUUegqPw8h9J56i2iCsPEs+A5AG 3VjmaGMY3zC2KLZOJby0g== X-Spam-Flag: NO UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:wDbDmP2TbaA=;TMQMZAm6MiIpKf/z8SW+2ZwoyPE xarAWDndou3HGpf9LveP+ItwBgmdK2ZA/6RSnAIte2WV/XUCKC09/G8B8AJYbnEF1EevHLWzu 3PP1NB9geEIuN+tDFxgnlJI3TyM9C4hLPguUcfZujQgAD5m9ODd38pu4QN3/hWfynQmWW3RdZ zHbpGeXm7Qn9/eymUpOqIegGFi10q9Umt5ZQyba2wwdDUT9QwwGDwdFYbcdK1DLSIsNWDMzX2 OhbwCJxnzItwrBHLrRGG+YugusX8Xn8pvx22myvHmjGbip+DlhC9+oXBJTq536rkz3/MDGbae tGPti4GW+IOwNMdY8l1xl2e8gG7jxCs5PqPfd5zUrU5rOIh7aVeN415pCcBPY6N6PSANA/li5 SxCQ8M0UNHMrmrhpmbrDWmMjShSYPFiK7P312x4zKPqDD/+dTV2dgs58bAdSL7gCimCpYwCFm oTyUGvMUpb0LiaHE3mc2SMnf90QXEFJQUevdo1mfg5GZgFD4R40YEryBUoSIjpNwgAcJE6rwX mJNBF/IHtoYbVnUTYIjnN10EnPbZqnvbYjFjwZDVjTKHo8Yk9qW81LlWB4/aJwh4Zb4E1jOSE xZMvAnxrw97d6OaVvOzXV6IhjeokmfRhi3S3TPNpB1tdEtNQDG4ZkWiBCQgXRR87B/MDyVQX7 lkgd4x56dK9KZta32XGRg87lMndE3rxfRBJxKvbYFnH653xAYrurelHXwlku5OaPysQ4UsWbU 7yBUQkn2WmvbrHtrJxNe6QQQlURMyOvu5+UVXH6XA1AQy8IJMzi+sWvOyrA5swI1xMqKVMjKb 7/Pc4+2yGy3tXSnr3sDcLRUA== X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: Michael Heerdegen , Stefan Kangas , 73853@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) Sean Whitton writes: > Hello, Hi Sean, > - Michael reports he is handling TRAMP in tramp.git and will import here > at an appropriate time. Done. Best regards, Michael. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Oct 30 08:55:36 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Oct 2024 12:55:36 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34957 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t68Ea-0000ME-66 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 30 Oct 2024 08:55:36 -0400 Received: from mail-oa1-f47.google.com ([209.85.160.47]:38916) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t68EX-0000M3-TV for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 30 Oct 2024 08:55:34 -0400 Received: by mail-oa1-f47.google.com with SMTP id 586e51a60fabf-2888bcc0f15so1073159fac.0 for <73853@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 30 Oct 2024 05:55:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1730292927; x=1730897727; h=content-transfer-encoding:cc:to:subject:message-id:date:from :in-reply-to:references:mime-version:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc :subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=5CuQYmUaP1FsSzg9VZ1cJaw3Efx09yOLzCnDF3s23mE=; b=ZQd4IJYJ79veJr2BIkiVg6R5DdlheG996JEaat6VQd6RdS9+J9WHfgleNj41bPzq0Y x0fhKQ2ThW8QtG2LqhgYyOWo8vhe3mUH0Gg5wAePSMqRfiWAAIc/aidjwB/KFAQabYuQ tLoRM6aTaR8/k1SAoHoRb7wZucyJPdSwP/PMU1MCvoPRHOhJifTDIIGVD6wZ2qSu7vnD gUKpzZ8yuZUeAWONgra1qc9ICyLLkZVgVUrS9HK8T8tLYpUgdLnmfskWnTXCkX0Dl7tO U/S7IYIuWM0KcIcsjn+AxbjvrlCCYZ5rZXQ2L/7guYvjMiZD91UHCICdd3OV4VRnJ7ke w4Ww== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YydVcpkHJ7E9uOzmY4evT1N1W5MLGujF0aPblHF+MmQCr+dEsUb 8iVNeACOD1KRKO+3KKllsm56thyaNiYchAyKq0BN2hZ16DTlmzUV+SSTWRWpVhMl+bv0piJynK9 XwPoyf5Llx1BBDNY0C4eszrr43vo= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGxerO3aLgC9H6M+8EUHPL547eu0UGqXUnCGrmJsw6PhJKuglwOhFwbmrZX3KewyLSUkNJ2t7Is+1B7JNDQ+Wc= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6830:2b12:b0:718:41c3:3ed6 with SMTP id 46e09a7af769-7186828eb8cmr4448335a34.3.1730292926029; Wed, 30 Oct 2024 05:55:26 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <87ed3zndd6.fsf@bernoul.li> In-Reply-To: <87ed3zndd6.fsf@bernoul.li> From: Corwin Brust Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2024 07:55:14 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? To: Jonas Bernoulli Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) On Tue, Oct 29, 2024 at 10:21=E2=80=AFAM Jonas Bernoulli = wrote: > > It is very disappointing that you have chosen to deprecate if-let and > when-let in such a rushed manner. The same was done and reverted in > > - Revert the depredations and remove the news entry. > +1 From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Oct 30 19:11:54 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 30 Oct 2024 23:11:54 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38129 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t6Hr0-00050A-5z for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 30 Oct 2024 19:11:54 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-f54.google.com ([209.85.208.54]:57470) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t6Hqx-000504-G8 for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 30 Oct 2024 19:11:52 -0400 Received: by mail-ed1-f54.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-5c9634c9160so387493a12.2 for <73853@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 30 Oct 2024 16:11:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1730329846; x=1730934646; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=to:subject:message-id:date:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=FTqBUKBqtMz1D14Gi30MQGc6/ay+TDDlb2A0KjVpvys=; b=AXx1rV4F0QAIdBcOJHo/JgI2S9RTb8c09YlwmItOzdwT6h+cFb8wJdeuo/5XAvMYHi Ljy5rTElkxRD8UMPb7dK0mVEJw6XHRv0tQWh5Q3xSzzOeAmp2KBZCKNv65sCW+Jqza09 USZg1/6qbGpFHYNk7QVEkt2Q/67Tczf+6X31KSy1YWx7aAvl9IzGcQk8fozpELVAsBbA lN+39+kCpb1FDV6+V2bpuXyWMT/MDdZp9w1ZhhXKUU1UVKaYgVqSEQM5z3gHRHYAoVt8 dMo1L6DjPAghdvaa/64jJyH1tCTfOR5ilPbTG4+gnWam+VlE91q4RGuZdfBYZF6q/ZzV DbZg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1730329846; x=1730934646; h=to:subject:message-id:date:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=FTqBUKBqtMz1D14Gi30MQGc6/ay+TDDlb2A0KjVpvys=; b=R3yw9WAH/99DaUMi7xWL6Ky7zgRwF0MqRI0WBrXWaUXWWPcF9Yk/CHqId5JP14b/fs FANdbbujwQc91Owl+06CyVHAG7TMFT9M0K2lJovx1h3J87N7tYh+L5r6OL4z04ljX5X4 96O75ooZZWvvLoBuuYXzMX4BY7IOIWK2MQVbsnDpkgDIZ+RtnhxZllEt+N/KH9iExBAG wnxYgdZNwaIT3OC2Td3E4taWzLITGANz8b5Yia7T0/kanb/J4RY1vgL3HVtvsCk+9SmH 842auDjmAo1bVDynZ4InYJrpeT8m6vAVzRGFO26sdFNr+wOeW4hyXPdpVFIn6PgRzume NxcA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXx2K4UOYHb78/pfuOAW79KQDtUStA+95yduoBszRejPiDkRzs1zFBxWY9fiPomN78muzwGbQ==@debbugs.gnu.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Yxh9VifbMcbVA0IXnujY7bVsh+UVXDiTc0xtiogCfJl8e1yxCX5 IzYKgqnlkio0xbywvvdK/Box5mA5CIajS2lBsz74YWDPZJo91Qb3bs6jD89noSKOVsxqDKWJGqE DV5Jqdu96kb6k3UNyscQidIH/L6cRDA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFa9L2ubvBm8omcYpQ70/gvsgpNc4GZ7EfJuiglEapL1WnLisVQjvs6xPxYXwoKoUjRumi4mQBDGeUIXOiFm9Q= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:4011:b0:5ca:18bb:6ad4 with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-5cbbf9208cfmr13241893a12.27.1730329845327; Wed, 30 Oct 2024 16:10:45 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 753933720722 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Wed, 30 Oct 2024 18:10:44 -0500 From: Stefan Kangas In-Reply-To: <87ed3zndd6.fsf@bernoul.li> References: <87ed3zndd6.fsf@bernoul.li> MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 30 Oct 2024 18:10:44 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? To: Jonas Bernoulli , 73853@debbugs.gnu.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Jonas Bernoulli writes: > It is very disappointing that you have chosen to deprecate if-let and > when-let in such a rushed manner. The same was done and reverted in > 2018, and many of the same actors are involved this time around. > I am surprised that you would make the same unforced error again. > > Reading through this and past conversations it is clear that there is no > consensus what the ultimate goal is. But as far as I can tell, few, if > any, are fully satisfied with the current (30.0.*) situation. There > also seems to be agreement that unfortunate mistakes were made in the > past, which limits our options now. The goal is: - To not have two macros doing the same thing, i.e. the pairs `when-let`/`when-let*` and `if-let`/`if-let*`. - To deprecate the single binding version of `when-let`. > This could have been prevented if more people (including non-debbugs and > non-emacs-devel regulars) were given a chance to think about the problem > and time to articulate their concerns and proposals, before facts were > created. Or even if the people who did take part in past conversations > had spend more time actually talking things through. I can agree that the timeline might have been on the shorter end here. That said, I wasn't aware of any large controversy surrounding this. If I was, I might have suggested that we give this more time. > The same could have been done every time the dissatisfying state of the > foo-let forms was brought up again, but instead new facts were rushed at > every turn. > > Without stopping this destructive pattern, you won't be able to fix this > mess. I don't know what this is in reference to, sorry. I feel like I'm missing some background. Could you perhaps help fill me in? I searched the archives, but failed to find anything relevant. > My short-term proposal is this: Hmm, the points you raise are interesting but procedural in character. Besides your concern that people might be unhappy with the decision, a point that is fully taken, perhaps it would help if we could focus on technical points instead. Your proposal seems to be that we should rethink the decision to mark `when-let`/`if-let` as obsolete. Is that correct? If yes, perhaps you could explain this in more detail? What problem do you see with marking them as obsolete? Do you have a suggestion for what we should do instead? From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Nov 01 10:09:40 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Nov 2024 14:09:40 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49740 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t6sLL-0002La-LW for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 01 Nov 2024 10:09:39 -0400 Received: from mail.hostpark.net ([212.243.197.30]:33950) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t6sLI-0002LR-FW for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 01 Nov 2024 10:09:38 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.hostpark.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA370164ED; Fri, 1 Nov 2024 15:09:33 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=bernoul.li; h= content-type:content-type:mime-version:message-id:date:date :references:in-reply-to:subject:subject:from:from; s=sel2011a; t=1730470173; bh=OIg85/W1plCjajSFCI9CfU0sHX1SYk2tq+opEvGt4wc=; b= Xpwfoip2yKxcHPehBDZefcpdGnHG1CAmUP865rvZZzY30Z0JGMvbBLkQKnqGx2fK m1Vo0eEPLx9ITEHnUtZNEPqSPK/UZxizmiaqLnKApMVeQi8PYG+fyIjM8B8ZwU0a aeM41Y/+ejs//WQ573qQg3Jx6mmPi6fM1m5Sb0C99Eo= X-Virus-Scanned: by Hostpark/NetZone Mailprotection at hostpark.net Received: from mail.hostpark.net ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (mail0.hostpark.net [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10224) with ESMTP id lNyYMHrzMvZS; Fri, 1 Nov 2024 15:09:33 +0100 (CET) Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange ECDHE (prime256v1) server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mail.hostpark.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 68AB016466; Fri, 1 Nov 2024 15:09:20 +0100 (CET) From: Jonas Bernoulli To: Stefan Kangas , 73853@debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: References: <87ed3zndd6.fsf@bernoul.li> Date: Fri, 01 Nov 2024 15:09:20 +0100 Message-ID: <87zfmjcagf.fsf@bernoul.li> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) Hello Stefan, Thanks for you reply! I intend to reply soon but I am stressed out right now and have to take it slow to avoid burning out. I currently feel like a volcano went off and there are fires all over the place that I have to put out. There's this issue, which due to its urgency makes everything else that is going on even more stressful. Many more issues than normal have been opened in my own repository over the last few days, about two dozen, including some bugs that should be addressed quickly. I also have no choice but to skip the montly release day, which since its introduction a few months ago has helps me release stress. And on top of all that, I have just been asked to intervene (and/or provide an outside perspective) in a bullying case. I was going to prioritize the foo-let issue over everything else, and was just about to reply to your message, when I saw the mail about the bullying, which I have decided to prioritize instead. > Do you have a suggestion for what we should do instead? In my next response I will concentrate on that. I.e., I'll do one of the things I earlier suggested we all do, think about what *my* (your) ideal solution would look like. Jonas From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Nov 01 12:34:21 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 1 Nov 2024 16:34:21 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:50499 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t6ubN-0006mu-0Z for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 01 Nov 2024 12:34:21 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-f43.google.com ([209.85.208.43]:46391) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t6ubK-0006mo-6M for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 01 Nov 2024 12:34:19 -0400 Received: by mail-ed1-f43.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-5c948c41edeso2606560a12.1 for <73853@debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 01 Nov 2024 09:34:18 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1730478792; x=1731083592; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=to:subject:message-id:date:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=oFQ0w1nA43Iq7d1Ttq+mvTUXerxSS7N3wUaY/H0AnJ0=; b=LzYNS2sNJe2o6EXy30UfJ6+RSjpMh65dsIY+dN8WcNy1yTmqzpQGCHwZNbyl0G+FI3 oDWQji+gfOLSnDeAJYOROl+u0IO+xADqrJO+zU3OpJby6OY7frSd+s56sQuzaSXiJrgx CBAPMhqYhz+/SjJincN5psnYbp3L4jeYCziHFOQCMoBxyQZxDcptDWrnHJXWqP/Im/s2 5lEjhf6jxGhYDIGrxqm5JCfbHjbJuy3FJDiV64Oe01FIi8IMCCZvswdOi+Q0d4qTMPJQ +rxMyYSgn6jbraqvP81Al60gJjVJTHBESr1Xi04HiUx4GxgtyUSFtL0H3pCGWrbxFWxD WwTQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1730478792; x=1731083592; h=to:subject:message-id:date:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from :x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=oFQ0w1nA43Iq7d1Ttq+mvTUXerxSS7N3wUaY/H0AnJ0=; b=f6TOVk8gBTE/ljL0RmQTfimyYmAVcH0XSBH0rbAs1M4qpCW1/IBdFWt08VE5R8uaf2 gm6ygEFi8hVZAbdjkriUYZ5t6xo3Q5zDhPNcdXc/HMh5f/XJw7/MCT/Ng6nGBJ3Ln0JR Ptz200LYNebZ8dmOIphtH3AA91mo95aO5pb/mk64H+hExFkRf6ElGj+j/WFRlGQnFqmb xfTv1zlSxjaEkuS+ZRkSn4IRRMBzhu1ZBdy+M+AeuVjyLSaRML7UAsNeEktMsi0iAHtk aM9EJ/JQE2Gc5e7tbUJmeBFIJDzhVdSdsEKtlnF4k7sc6siT5vXtHrsnYwbs82NDoYNU xsTQ== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCVFCg0apF9TyC9mU4qJzbePF3YGzBvqZo7JqLu9otMUQ9hD3wElLX/cOWGbRWxKROIM18b/jQ==@debbugs.gnu.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0Ywr+uXAvMLEZZXraxPqHZrHglIKZ76xe27HF9N8xbDh1rpDcK2G wBYF3NuthpXzjsOQJuSYUfUG7Tac3xofjor/e8QhdbW/MsqiWKHT66uSvcjHmG7y/LhTLFXpzWr 0nWGDpc2pPkj/TUuS2+b6rpNPlVU= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFTes5SuCOJaNRum+tsRMCcXch5WLXX6hjRCJG9tOvQZN+Jl6zNXyqmTJASMlUj/l//gO+iFmFdVUminaZXjvM= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:4023:b0:5cb:6706:ccd with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-5cea96f4b89mr6484149a12.25.1730478790595; Fri, 01 Nov 2024 09:33:10 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 753933720722 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Fri, 1 Nov 2024 09:33:09 -0700 From: Stefan Kangas In-Reply-To: <87zfmjcagf.fsf@bernoul.li> References: <87ed3zndd6.fsf@bernoul.li> <87zfmjcagf.fsf@bernoul.li> MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2024 09:33:09 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? To: Jonas Bernoulli , 73853@debbugs.gnu.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Jonas Bernoulli writes: > I intend to reply soon but I am stressed out right now and have to take > it slow to avoid burning out. I currently feel like a volcano went off > and there are fires all over the place that I have to put out. > > There's this issue, which due to its urgency makes everything else that > is going on even more stressful. Many more issues than normal have been > opened in my own repository over the last few days, about two dozen, > including some bugs that should be addressed quickly. I also have no > choice but to skip the montly release day, which since its introduction > a few months ago has helps me release stress. And on top of all that, > I have just been asked to intervene (and/or provide an outside > perspective) in a bullying case. > > I was going to prioritize the foo-let issue over everything else, and > was just about to reply to your message, when I saw the mail about the > bullying, which I have decided to prioritize instead. I'm sorry to hear that things have been stressful. FWIW, I don't see a huge rush here. Emacs 31 is still far away, and while some package authors are meticulously tracking master, an effort that is of course greatly appreciated, the overwhelming majority don't. So this won't affect the lions share of Emacs Lisp users any time soon. That is to say, please take your time. The last thing we want is for you or anyone else to burn out. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Nov 03 01:54:11 2024 Received: (at control) by debbugs.gnu.org; 3 Nov 2024 05:54:11 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58095 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t7TYx-0000ro-0C for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 03 Nov 2024 01:54:11 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-f50.google.com ([209.85.208.50]:58696) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1t7TYv-0000ra-HO for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 03 Nov 2024 01:54:10 -0400 Received: by mail-ed1-f50.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-5cecbddb574so933355a12.1 for ; Sat, 02 Nov 2024 22:54:09 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1730613184; x=1731217984; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=to:subject:message-id:date:mime-version:from:from:to:cc:subject :date:message-id:reply-to; bh=7+ysEfmspFj6iph4lUxoKi5hWQVjY228ciWjjDW0Ix8=; b=nIk+DNwWfxhSqe1gc7gBOIkH4cPvb6JOnYUnCymXbVeETchmnB2DbDOy7x7RVHcTcD BpltiLZFNvv1uAP46tnIQUlBcQUQ30wCMCqcYn7hJYRXjQJn8DBP8bitojrvgXreGWde CjPr8cQgFFHLdOOq41mSW6WDHBeyMaIjhewbtrdyPnlV1vTsAz9+yGIBG/BFdi+0eR01 FXHyXR2Kvfua8dySZUFMjngm8gXhWsXNTAc3FCA1eH0BX2+Y8K9oZXN6KPEIoMruNUV4 NJJq5tW+JrbXb5eWFpnHwF77FQ1r/B2U9Hkcec6lg2iiDfqHrEYZ4WcP5sYe5iuJdZd9 aRYQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1730613184; x=1731217984; h=to:subject:message-id:date:mime-version:from:x-gm-message-state :from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=7+ysEfmspFj6iph4lUxoKi5hWQVjY228ciWjjDW0Ix8=; b=chWf+ARPLtr9Org9Z8VoD1ngG1yYysDrhOpiTieWO/9C3vI26m4wONBUEcKTq0V9Vr ufYgdD1xeZY3iTVTTtp9MSqdXeEjUMlh8bdcTdluWzgkVYpdcOSBIEUmgoC+/oQdda7z XZnUReAzs2VDCr3A2ydZb5vthRQrclN0beHKJgwCXDvGXnScLpM2D6jquyywmORQVq+S DOc51vbp0XS8CYLxmvyrtiS7cOIwpcjjEdGC5ZPCz754WMlKsfLie4+jvoLxD7DZ0UkM q2JTtKJgJCzSOevPMxUfoPNRQOtAx0CqTAy4J6Hdaj9pookUYU0JOPv99XAlncSaMbwJ +lZQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyBIfGzN4FoGISwgLVgrTC8oB5C/gDEd9yI49VAo5h6U5JguVvc DmfR1B0r+PNMyjbPkycOug13BNdKtLlzRxkhCq46IqG10Zgp39diyAophk1mYjsejsKj387naXo /YI8lDrmtWM1KPdxR3XZVZx5Cy/vsTQ== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IGvouyCChKLzUdSMWozpFWWHeaOuyivartyvviCghBbm6AEoGyPG4VkirgYu3Pz7Tq96XzjbNP4aI9QLEynO50= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:51ca:b0:5ce:d397:9f5 with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-5ced3970cbemr771460a12.24.1730613183832; Sat, 02 Nov 2024 22:53:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: from 753933720722 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Sat, 2 Nov 2024 22:53:03 -0700 From: Stefan Kangas MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Sat, 2 Nov 2024 22:53:03 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: control message for bug #73853 To: control@debbugs.gnu.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: control X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) severity 73853 wishlist quit From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Nov 22 14:46:51 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Nov 2024 19:46:51 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55640 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tEZcA-0005CA-Uu for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 22 Nov 2024 14:46:51 -0500 Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:27223) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tEZc8-0005Bt-LL for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 22 Nov 2024 14:46:49 -0500 Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 099C41007C7; Fri, 22 Nov 2024 14:46:42 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1732304797; bh=EBECb0/RZ8kWTI4nQJxJyWaLd0AHTQnyCGq8vAR8z4U=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=U657K0ZCGQZ0yP/1aUcv1JjsHly061fe3lpE8mz5eDpol1yScYkRzkHmn3I8mWaa/ ZbdWJ6TjTB4mFCvpC6oBhGZOIuTfnNzVnKtc3JNj2j7CBIgskTArqpdGVV7lMPFkal UWTofGfAyIofNiR6EF+qER6HV5OlAGPrzHe31rPLHjKqS5/GBx/TeWFlQ4Gv4bpoGW c56al3fmMRRJrFKrQ+Yp03/n9n+B2ZTuHDO90K5FepCQoXHyBWnpbDNcYZ8siqEsBp NWolccdyG1i6btH5EhC5V8N6Uskxt04La4OFTIhiAA8RLy804Fmp1hcdY/UUeqFNXV xHzS+ZlowUlFQ== Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2D7CB100417; Fri, 22 Nov 2024 14:46:37 -0500 (EST) Received: from alfajor (unknown [10.35.228.139]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 1D6AD120494; Fri, 22 Nov 2024 14:46:37 -0500 (EST) From: Stefan Monnier To: Sean Whitton Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: <878qud7uj7.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> (Sean Whitton's message of "Thu, 24 Oct 2024 16:51:56 +0800") Message-ID: References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87ed48b3er.fsf_-_@melete.silentflame.com> <87a5ew5few.fsf@web.de> <878qud7uj7.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2024 14:46:30 -0500 User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-SPAM-INFO: Spam detection results: 0 ALL_TRUSTED -1 Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain DKIM_VALID_EF -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from domain X-SPAM-LEVEL: X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: Michael Heerdegen , Stefan Kangas , 73853@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) >>>> - I'd like to go ahead and install a patch marking when-let and if-l= et >>>> as obsolete, unless Michael is keen to be the one to do it as the >>>> initiator of the previous effort [...] > Done. Beside the use of `make-obsolete` instead of putting the `obsolete` inside `declare`, I see a more serious problem with this patch. E.g. (defun my-foo () (when-let ((x (point))) (goto-char x))) gives 2 warnings rather than one: In my-foo: foo.el:3:19: Warning: =E2=80=98when-let=E2=80=99 is an obsolete macro (= as of 31.1); use =E2=80=98when-let*=E2=80=99 or =E2=80=98and-let*=E2=80=99 instead. foo.el:3:2: Warning: =E2=80=98if-let=E2=80=99 is an obsolete macro (as = of 31.1); use =E2=80=98if-let*=E2=80=99 instead. - Stefan From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Nov 23 09:35:12 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Nov 2024 14:35:12 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57281 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tErE7-0001lx-M9 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 23 Nov 2024 09:35:12 -0500 Received: from sendmail.purelymail.com ([34.202.193.197]:55136) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tErE3-0001kz-ES for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 23 Nov 2024 09:35:09 -0500 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=jYmidRyK3Dym9fMkYgRAGbac0lbeZfyc/htUltWOkZOE6TY9Wq/ulBUq0A0fcszmdJvZt3FBSBtte0XrscPOk/DR8obhLB3aNR7ulz4s6WyM7Tvueb5LFfybky5ZqfPev7szrT5kE68xElQw5lBejrLhGtbT9jEW5jQrQzGlACiC4ZZ63Vv0CixN5tG57G1oyOGbnbklDdFUkDJuN6eYZoUZ/ylhBH46We954pw0CbCViC/tBHtu3nk17e/9iATGrLcMBEdC8d+fjWdMA5o0l80p8R4uQ+uXxhx5CvpaLsqQlgfgEHhmcftdYD9mJS50sjqvmDiLgPHJxa9wOto1Ag==; s=purelymail3; d=spwhitton.name; v=1; bh=rfG6GTM3y0r778K6lO5oewk1giyFUeDsvsOEBfoK8Jg=; h=Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date; DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=NcmibnW3lSOFSIyzScapt5xfxFwr6FDYa3SsQj8Ex6YHNsA4wGbDVWCBnawJokgtxylX98par7Y3Ql/YThpMexl3XJ65jKW1ces90Q00k1z8ftfp+Sp5h23gsXKoZtihBFBSTs4m9dIs7rpqyxUPf4HFlkEbEnZ7e2LNGwjJ9MOYXiPaCIvlYX5hygtZdMF1NKa/G7mXsoGdFXKiYRCIizApCtHm3C9H8zP9Of1kuUnlddXMQqGyc4CIKpihvX2WXuwRZtm+VSRgDxPEij0of+c4VN6nBfumIGx3oMzqUTBmkUjqjav1Pl3o5tML6rdNe+4o9CPWYpoadSZpe7+q0Q==; s=purelymail3; d=purelymail.com; v=1; bh=rfG6GTM3y0r778K6lO5oewk1giyFUeDsvsOEBfoK8Jg=; h=Feedback-ID:Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date; Feedback-ID: 20115:3760:null:purelymail X-Pm-Original-To: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org Received: by smtp.purelymail.com (Purelymail SMTP) with ESMTPSA id 1337527534; (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384); Sat, 23 Nov 2024 14:35:00 +0000 (UTC) Received: by melete.silentflame.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4F5117E1FCA; Sat, 23 Nov 2024 22:34:54 +0800 (CST) From: Sean Whitton To: Stefan Monnier Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier via's message of "Fri, 22 Nov 2024 14:46:30 -0500") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87ed48b3er.fsf_-_@melete.silentflame.com> <87a5ew5few.fsf@web.de> <878qud7uj7.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2024 22:34:54 +0800 Message-ID: <87a5dqxbld.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: Michael Heerdegen , Stefan Kangas , 73853@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hello, On Fri 22 Nov 2024 at 02:46pm -05, Stefan Monnier via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" wrote: >>>>> - I'd like to go ahead and install a patch marking when-let and if-let >>>>> as obsolete, unless Michael is keen to be the one to do it as the >>>>> initiator of the previous effort > [...] >> Done. > > Beside the use of `make-obsolete` instead of putting the `obsolete` > inside `declare`, I didn't know about this distinction. Can you let me know why it would be better to use a declaration? > I see a more serious problem with this patch. E.g. > > (defun my-foo () (when-let ((x (point))) (goto-char x))) > > gives 2 warnings rather than one: I think this is just inherent to the fact that these macros depend on each other, though it would be nice to fix if we can. -- Sean Whitton From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Nov 23 11:15:47 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Nov 2024 16:15:47 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58750 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tEsnT-0006uw-0Z for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 23 Nov 2024 11:15:47 -0500 Received: from mail-ed1-f51.google.com ([209.85.208.51]:49206) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tEsnR-0006ul-5A for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 23 Nov 2024 11:15:45 -0500 Received: by mail-ed1-f51.google.com with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-5cfd3a7e377so4102890a12.2 for <73853@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 23 Nov 2024 08:15:45 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20230601; t=1732378484; x=1732983284; darn=debbugs.gnu.org; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :from:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=s4rbd89Z4BrXf/qAEXwcCG4rU7MwZXl1UGWa5oF31H4=; b=fwAvGhTHnaPgxUJTkFQKPBVi1Fv+l0tik35J+BdDxy+8LRFV80jVyPLnA8AqNvotsq FwusBUHgRRDmrLay4qci4muTyxnZ627idURR3EYkj3rwxWhnqM4END4z0pLzDDH3a5zN 7dmz1Q1HohbWX4BeOEwjG4Jst5mulrzyKd53IAVOf1L8Ku5TuOyn8AqmIV5HH3QXlr/w Mw0Txgh/cOoAH2eG0BWFjLmTTChOw0ad+zDv0yX0AhqPoaa91O9DyNQ3YqJmiW15UkHP PFWd4+qZpuiGK6YQWyGqtqVuzif8TT4r+wpasQmbRBD5S/YH/cU1HvmQnjL4bjXlggCO qAQA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20230601; t=1732378484; x=1732983284; h=cc:to:subject:message-id:date:mime-version:references:in-reply-to :from:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:date:message-id:reply-to; bh=s4rbd89Z4BrXf/qAEXwcCG4rU7MwZXl1UGWa5oF31H4=; b=rQF95YZBLPoo8UDQry1IepJOZIutxAmIf+gPwxhJ42k9bovLyjUWkHO30Wp4wOZyES kh9onwq2b+f3dhMIp7xVGhsrRzMhyxWkQEuX37VRc2HCkmTy9++hIhwtNHhE/FsReLNQ TPVCeF3vLtvAkCLm0anOYqWr7zAAWHZAt5ve/imYJJxppQ5zR2aeuN09oKEZ8riMLsoC 481BQBXW5dKObia4h9WC9USaq8XpJL47Y4+AaKch/omt+OEs4KPUavIB6kS4MikVZ+MA orRkSIwhB3hom7T2GOgXi0cWGizKfO4ezqiSLL3bpfQfsgH7JiKXoKzCV4BsWYaXKzf7 nVYA== X-Forwarded-Encrypted: i=1; AJvYcCXnSkZYIFMyPKLhwKtRUb79uWyUUhUKu6gaY1xwUp+ZnMJYDKOtVmSUEvXBvuV5mbhk38xNig==@debbugs.gnu.org X-Gm-Message-State: AOJu0YyuILxGvgOvVV3u73YDkJDGIqzArbnW9gG1vmcLxb0YwFPGuNqU rL+pn8wvNzkiV68XWyWXe+uBtytU9GPSbmPlDN96Cj2/AickxjIjN/BvkX06COi1Ema2P/1LKFU prgmE7rlkQ1MTwlpadzjPGLZMNTc= X-Gm-Gg: ASbGnctyQklsGbqcla1ekqZOBEMo1e0G9Q7VaZLFwdzRrDSJeTCm6kvPIUqIIHBudTo +Hj88cNfHI/Q3lTDiT95JTL5WN+QFiy/F+g== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGHT+IFKtlG8hB93ZHTJ4DJC/HUmPLGyKteD2u3zzKvUDpaZbk9uNCzwvACk28RA+1USlqu1UaCWY611T7ik6BM3aY8= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:26cc:b0:5c9:59e6:e908 with SMTP id 4fb4d7f45d1cf-5d0205b6047mr6088632a12.6.1732378484179; Sat, 23 Nov 2024 08:14:44 -0800 (PST) Received: from 753933720722 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Sat, 23 Nov 2024 11:14:43 -0500 From: Stefan Kangas In-Reply-To: <87a5dqxbld.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87ed48b3er.fsf_-_@melete.silentflame.com> <87a5ew5few.fsf@web.de> <878qud7uj7.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87a5dqxbld.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Sat, 23 Nov 2024 11:14:43 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? To: Sean Whitton , Stefan Monnier Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: Michael Heerdegen , 73853@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Sean Whitton writes: > On Fri 22 Nov 2024 at 02:46pm -05, Stefan Monnier via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" wrote: > >> Beside the use of `make-obsolete` instead of putting the `obsolete` >> inside `declare`, > > I didn't know about this distinction. Can you let me know why it would > be better to use a declaration? AFAIK, while they are technically the same, using a declaration is cleaner. We prefer it for that reason. >> I see a more serious problem with this patch. E.g. >> >> (defun my-foo () (when-let ((x (point))) (goto-char x))) >> >> gives 2 warnings rather than one: > > I think this is just inherent to the fact that these macros depend on > each other, though it would be nice to fix if we can. I think `with-suppressed-warnings` should work here. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Nov 23 19:45:56 2024 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Nov 2024 00:45:56 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59970 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tF0l9-0000Dr-O3 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 23 Nov 2024 19:45:56 -0500 Received: from sendmail.purelymail.com ([34.202.193.197]:45072) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tF0l8-0000DW-6b for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 23 Nov 2024 19:45:54 -0500 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=tz/NoadWy/g+4fX7TcUbHeWMjnuXbN2CZVZDVX5YdDsQ77mITUzM8sjI+xNQ4er/OjEoRlqRKDsI7vVWMsCkoVDDpLRiA4OKoF3VREUZiDyVHC5ATLfUUI4v0tvSRvb2LNaSwhlMr/B0PG4/ubEe8KuI/BaZ7Q8s1fDItSBJzyZ+MWtEsAnTaoBYNwo0r7zH5/qjSRjGDW+b0PSpPBxDUWhFbTfU/WNLZFZeAEdEyZT1IqnQZ3lUgmrtTH7+h/8Ow6PkBufkrqqlUhmrTGVF50aEeGqQ9sTqI3A1YupmzauzGM9HEdb2Iq0fq89mx9TB6MR7vjZfnK3+8VwJnCvV3A==; s=purelymail3; d=spwhitton.name; v=1; bh=/rzUXUNd16yfX9G5POckoNH4qXvIPKsanQ5Xei2P/Gk=; h=Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date; DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=4dlLgYcrvVWcnWnQ+FkvzDkSr445gc663PSDAawWrvsdovKbgPujRx+3QdQXag8eCh2lu5MBbvy6U9Zh9OKR3UgM6KRapYGvICvj118OONrruvo7mWn8ZuO5EOox7mJS7NaNW/6u3zeF3/1VYce7ymm47ZK30F6w9wX7UG+AZlsTDfUebAjmbjVg3Lw6k0S2DOZGCOIDGOTsY+WTu7GhDvP7lxyW9gB3Su7dn9+EVi5f48Fd1PcaKsr2tQWT1VKWTkSI3nUgfpHyV7Jx/KfDR1uZ24lDtUPcr4Ig3kBJqJMg+YaLJ9IqfZ37U2p92Gq8jx9WDls4ebOOIZd3S5DVhw==; s=purelymail3; d=purelymail.com; v=1; bh=/rzUXUNd16yfX9G5POckoNH4qXvIPKsanQ5Xei2P/Gk=; h=Feedback-ID:Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date; Feedback-ID: 20115:3760:null:purelymail X-Pm-Original-To: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org Received: by smtp.purelymail.com (Purelymail SMTP) with ESMTPSA id 845082914; (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384); Sun, 24 Nov 2024 00:45:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: by melete.silentflame.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 9EE107E36F9; Sun, 24 Nov 2024 08:45:43 +0800 (CST) From: Sean Whitton To: Stefan Kangas Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: (Stefan Kangas's message of "Sat, 23 Nov 2024 11:14:43 -0500") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87froszrs6.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87ed48b3er.fsf_-_@melete.silentflame.com> <87a5ew5few.fsf@web.de> <878qud7uj7.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> <87a5dqxbld.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> Date: Sun, 24 Nov 2024 08:45:43 +0800 Message-ID: <87o725wjbc.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: Michael Heerdegen , Stefan Monnier , 73853@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hello, On Sat 23 Nov 2024 at 11:14am -05, Stefan Kangas wrote: > Sean Whitton writes: > >> I think this is just inherent to the fact that these macros depend on >> each other, though it would be nice to fix if we can. > > I think `with-suppressed-warnings` should work here. At least for bytecompiled files, it seems. Installed, thanks both. -- Sean Whitton From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jan 17 10:40:45 2025 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Jan 2025 15:40:45 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38562 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tYoSj-0003ia-Dk for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 10:40:45 -0500 Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:55666) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tYoSf-0003iC-BD for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 10:40:42 -0500 Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 9E2E7441C58; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 10:40:32 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1737128431; bh=pLtBW+aCa4xpKC2f41lSbupts93OAa2+daaJuLOj8qk=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=J41zqACFNrNTGs81mk9qF3IacU5/Ro0Eye4l1GzHJT1JRR+yEGrbXZsaJOCnt/miJ jc5rVgKWrbjdg8Js7z1BhFMXsAHIduvascITMcAQlxyrjETQzjNpm7pKDTUQwOzpld IJ5GIpAB0REmntb8OxmwMfjcDXqXtWSDAijLstDhGc6O8XSxzMuWCkiSFiKn1ul3aj ZBKK7aVYx04llhsRY7IdMJFe7HBQqifw7KC4ZMN3wRd4KbRC2QgCz1+0nnLaXZEo/L UUdXVy5YtKfClvIHT2aZeXUULQj61WcI/ebhpC6LTW9VSJIMO5QEIxFVPesnJwicCd U8grj8E8hV1xw== Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 86F2C441642; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 10:40:31 -0500 (EST) Received: from alfajor (modemcable167.145-162-184.mc.videotron.ca [184.162.145.167]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 60C591204C9; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 10:40:31 -0500 (EST) From: Stefan Monnier To: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; and-let* is useless In-Reply-To: <87sess3g4m.fsf@web.de> (Michael Heerdegen's message of "Sat, 19 Oct 2024 05:50:49 +0200") Message-ID: References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87sess3g4m.fsf@web.de> Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 10:39:45 -0500 User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-SPAM-INFO: Spam detection results: 0 ALL_TRUSTED -1 Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain DKIM_VALID_EF -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from domain X-SPAM-LEVEL: X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: Michael Heerdegen , Sean Whitton X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > remains quite philosophical. And replacing calls of `and-let*' with > equivalent calls of `when-let*' doesn't make code easier to read, IMO. Of course it can make it easier to read since the reader doesn't need to know yet another construct and the subtle difference with its almost twin. > Right. The Lisp convention of using `when' for pure control flow and > `and' for returning values is a good aid to readability. AFAIK this convention is followed only by some coders, so it doesn't help readability because you can't rely on it. > If we don't have and-let*, then we can't use this convention in the case > that we also want to bind variables. Then again, we don't have such a "value returning vs not" duplication and associated convention for `let`, `progn`, `lambda`, `unwind-protect`, `catch`, `condition-case, ... The fact we have all three of if/when/and is not a good justification for `and-let*`. Stefan From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jan 17 19:25:39 2025 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Jan 2025 00:25:39 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39375 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tYweh-00009o-2Z for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 19:25:39 -0500 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.15.14]:39809) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tYwee-00009W-1g for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 19:25:37 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=web.de; s=s29768273; t=1737159929; x=1737764729; i=michael_heerdegen@web.de; bh=of58KCALhajT/ftQdabwMKLF1biJYltGNXmsfidLw1g=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date: Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:cc:content-transfer-encoding: content-type:date:from:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject: to; b=XyDUgW4WWwrNZnUnD94Zt+eEvWxoyThX7a9zt1tPE6KZlUGSjOCZBrSmsH0dF47x emph7oeJL/13ogBg+2WLpbP0eKnPSP1bpSq+L8QJyeJo9FzrC6O/4gTYldAYlC7dJ K3C3lBJcjZbFK1mQcEBKBQR89RPj/VCpa9L6zfUiFLI/4zr3blIr9FdSCZvJepfsz MDlnBdpCJKZokdO7OfuHJ6J3S7ovQuHCs03qivMlZnHPKc8e8COPUBzDYUgh4G60e lwJDC+uf+nlKk52rlLVh7DPgGuN28dR3Rg0u663z/N5yT8V9geo2EnsjkfNEOmTX6 q+e4l6onsXRglz7EOQ== X-UI-Sender-Class: 814a7b36-bfc1-4dae-8640-3722d8ec6cd6 Received: from drachen.dragon ([92.75.138.197]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb006 [213.165.67.108]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1M3V6E-1tYOgl1hI2-0089ht; Sat, 18 Jan 2025 01:25:29 +0100 From: Michael Heerdegen To: Stefan Monnier Subject: Re: bug#73853: Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Fri, 17 Jan 2025 10:39:45 -0500") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87sess3g4m.fsf@web.de> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2025 01:26:44 +0100 Message-ID: <87jzathsqj.fsf_-_@web.de> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:tccjO9Rbv+/z+D7hz1gUivnwNPX+ZfqZRqrgB4Y1YQPoaAiXo0Z J1/oUmpDwuWcAZz3fI3Y+bi1PLpSANvv6ZETHOiA6lWfvxBjJ1NRNvEUXzZnO8U7NZ6AC0A b8V+DArYUMYYPSTePWw2sHqWvohEDF9T7onMP3mquuksz03BHDdpY1VvlBbGSZ8nWlbYyDM neoA780Ja0gfqVd7GYXfw== X-Spam-Flag: NO UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:crhNcqy90rU=;ZCjKx/S130wjlKYUbjgXtWv7Fg6 2xgEV2n2sHcjNKF/f6yWOPpzNX1SzslJiwz9UEnVBfs6czmv9kI09OgSqs5LxyMvtnmMYUTuQ 9yDIleQRKm8qgwNuPtYQhrNuhrynHABpP2AO+afYR3YQJFhl15y4cUxMpYty02i4qHE9+kgWS vOd5L4WZUK76NKfIwIRr0eZIH/upXkqwmASHNnP1fshWa6TKO6osWJSSEo/BCH/eJu0er7Gm3 wR3aBsul35eCFDLcClmuuh+Ixctc3eP8lSJtDwPz/wJMxqM6BBJhXPxOeK6GekGzPg09DIhj8 mLDIih2I6AYNoB22ThozqyX1djImij6RGdNDlSQFB9rlRKTS9NiogqNSFwZkBVzhVJ+TduEKl neto4u2gjuNycoDPP3s2OyCp+sYwVRmD1BFpvFivPViraXLrAfwyBdlQPXRxSN6hBiZ/b2jWM LBYe2zl08qomavPcDvCJf/o6J/UIcgB3hpa34p+BzzIYVtw2sqGn/qvWud33A2fcl01hJsnBU 8vduoFtOWXb0GKw3Y8iK7cUFibmUIb2RuALjmy1y3AKq9ol4nL9yZhG6ZhC9ZBvZMnTlQvLfL syOMFWZk3XmZK3zElNfJ0LglP4YklXLmei4z5Rj9y6wyMF1BkE2sujk3GX0nlpdad+gNNJPdp XCrsPNCQ7w66hvF8lB97KG1khRaRsBFtjz1zsLwnWU02haWM8x44e5V12BuxR/PRDxVyMlvn7 HuOY3+rt32z/kHIbAXDmmekEdTP1iDadzfiP91bih1GbL1tPzjR1pHzKULImXr9BI3WfDdSs6 s5AKK1t4mGhPhKXxKv2s8K/zI3670Gs4TY881XicZFR6FiJ5zrzM0YQpSO4jBYj0LwohXNMJ8 mTdoiGg+yPdETwgLCFj9u5x7Oiyw3a+EYeMrLLJ6b1ltsoP+VO83kIaHpXAnGPVl619JJ5wDH FhQRP8IzskiQWEdMffIJQ6+umk7B5+36A7nESLGOe0evYCeBZ3orNKjGdScPh9Ii0cv6quOFt blY3PeRKxO5mK/wEjShHezQfSGpkbCFMrrTXTeNDVmqSIZYjXqPg818p2kFJy+sub444kBxbZ +f8Hf90tJWcGGqPfKEh1//chKPEUSZiZzRgIIa7D1qLPFy1elhVTZH5NnpjJeaXaqjiFIB+Gc Z92x5uaVGwXoBZMskdd6rPFV30mlR1eXgf4YWMMN1JQ== X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org, Sean Whitton X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) Stefan Monnier writes: > > Right. The Lisp convention of using `when' for pure control flow and > > `and' for returning values is a good aid to readability. > > AFAIK this convention is followed only by some coders, so it doesn't > help readability because you can't rely on it. This is a weak argument of its own. You can't rely on any convention being honored in the code. That doesn't mean that it's a bad convention. > > If we don't have and-let*, then we can't use this convention in the case > > that we also want to bind variables. > > Then again, we don't have such a "value returning vs not" duplication > and associated convention for `let`, `progn`, `lambda`, > `unwind-protect`, `catch`, `condition-case, ... > > The fact we have all three of if/when/and is not a good justification > for `and-let*`. if/when/let are a bit different than the constructs in your list because the values in conditionals have different semantics when interpreted as a conditional than as an value or object. This is part of the reason. I can't imagine that changing (if (and-let ...) ...) to (if (when-let ...) ...) is something that makes the language more attractive, even when we get rid of the similar twin thing, or how you called it. So my opinion is still that we have to decide between two similarly not-so-nice choices, and which one is preferred is more a matter of taste, so the hassle of changing it is not worth it. Michael. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jan 17 21:31:59 2025 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Jan 2025 02:31:59 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39487 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tYycw-0006XF-Th for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 21:31:59 -0500 Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:51985) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tYyct-0006Wz-I0 for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 21:31:57 -0500 Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id E23AC800C4; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 21:31:47 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1737167506; bh=H5k+ygo9FoYXQkm/w4NMg/M52/UMmdbKtosSiOvn6Mg=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=ek8lmui4jdRKHfbq5oM4ULttJqUEVgFWk7brwGDIUXg9HWnSRUpSFAGRMsRt+WQ05 10Xm5UKJeyHKb6qSL/f905eV8CzSpucZyc7ZcrcpZa1aJlOgGW4ZAIL/Dwdw4CVlox WE59PgpZUdSCNQpo0SUeJAciWfH5CIpU8Tqdd35/4VSP9/w5FlgNCF3Jxrlk6xaFeR GrZ/VKw5h9XNAyEsgYsz2Z/kKV8PUqBtaMynV5Vh6cZ801J+6owJJoiJhbkaGQjnTJ bY5ugFbdUz4ZQtyCkXqYN8z5aGapztXabXADjBDLU3xN7kWegylpoXDO7+dyUkyrIZ 2e6a27Qm6i3hg== Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 6D82D80456; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 21:31:46 -0500 (EST) Received: from alfajor (104-195-232-86.cpe.teksavvy.com [104.195.232.86]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 32C20120099; Fri, 17 Jan 2025 21:31:46 -0500 (EST) From: Stefan Monnier To: Michael Heerdegen Subject: Re: bug#73853: Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: <87jzathsqj.fsf_-_@web.de> (Michael Heerdegen's message of "Sat, 18 Jan 2025 01:26:44 +0100") Message-ID: References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87sess3g4m.fsf@web.de> <87jzathsqj.fsf_-_@web.de> Date: Fri, 17 Jan 2025 21:31:45 -0500 User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-SPAM-INFO: Spam detection results: 0 ALL_TRUSTED -1 Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP AWL -0.033 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain DKIM_VALID_EF -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from domain X-SPAM-LEVEL: X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org, Sean Whitton X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Michael Heerdegen [2025-01-18 01:26:44] wrote: > Stefan Monnier writes: >> > Right. The Lisp convention of using `when' for pure control flow and >> > `and' for returning values is a good aid to readability. >> AFAIK this convention is followed only by some coders, so it doesn't >> help readability because you can't rely on it. > This is a weak argument of its own. You can't rely on any convention > being honored in the code. That doesn't mean that it's a bad convention. My argument is not that it's a bad convention. Instead I'm arguing that the supposed benefit of this convention doesn't really apply because it's not obeyed widely enough. >> Then again, we don't have such a "value returning vs not" duplication >> and associated convention for `let`, `progn`, `lambda`, >> `unwind-protect`, `catch`, `condition-case, ... >> >> The fact we have all three of if/when/and is not a good justification >> for `and-let*`. > > if/when/let are a bit different than the constructs in your list because > the values in conditionals have different semantics when interpreted as > a conditional than as an value or object. This is part of the reason. I don't see the "different semantics" you're alluding to, I'm afraid. Can you explain what you mean? > I can't imagine that changing (if (and-let ...) ...) to (if (when-let > ...) ...) [ FWIW, in all of Emacs and (Non)GNU ELPA, I could find only one "(if (and-let* ...) ...)", the one in `help.el` ] > is something that makes the language more attractive, It wouldn't change anything to the readability of the code, AFAICT. In both cases the preceding `if` makes it immediately clear that we're interested in the final return value but only in whether it's nil or not. Stefan From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Jan 18 07:04:17 2025 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Jan 2025 12:04:18 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40591 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tZ7Yn-0001JP-IB for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 18 Jan 2025 07:04:17 -0500 Received: from sendmail.purelymail.com ([34.202.193.197]:37908) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tZ7Yk-0001J6-T5 for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 18 Jan 2025 07:04:15 -0500 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=ryfUVfo4D//U689nGKb9XTPDAo/iZ2s7x2rTBFgp1BcS0ham9ltK4XkAYebr60mW+ML/klsB4LMNZh8wE/yHYVpVjc/PXoixy1sqeSgeu4RINMFHMSS8bVA4nh7R+vygjiC9+5DD4jynjmOAPR8IS5cNZm7k3kirTlsnjnc4YyBWIijJXVBcOhCWTY0/sy+vRRdLu1DXCH4WDl/1gNQxb94IYKhisHQyTL7vZhwbTjJ2XNo5CI2HeP9V7pQDpFXLKstFLrnJtyVAy4/6rFVWbgTdTGozK++UwuJEG1CTUzgWtNK4Zpprz2SuzvrykOycA5RWieGXJYtMGdS9KJHCxA==; s=purelymail2; d=spwhitton.name; v=1; bh=gCloWubxvccXhwKOWJW/JOxWYhKVTgH1LNL65vgX3Y4=; h=Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date; DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=fBVB7sxaIb9Uwc4pTwSs1UD9tCg6apRffFxwscBjB722f+meup7hPWD6RR2aqdpMw4aaHIValPtIoB8qwJsH9eZopk3TsX0INNEC6YfRysKqCfkfwnJ2dZbvAE3KMLRlho2kFVkHosJ4ChzZXzu2PoU1B4VZg/PB15oi/EFHYFtD3k8NuWLYgR2sUfKl/OI00+0yZGOZ9TxJbTyvjMWsflnWbd9xmRw5G61ukEhrO52OCdOIWi0T9PoIgxiu+JqbIxWQbSE+pFdVODWVbx0kSTygtqKxT1YMFSFngkBSAb57vaunOH9hYYG6ZwM+89wR8VfcuLYK0crdQmjMr7YhlA==; s=purelymail2; d=purelymail.com; v=1; bh=gCloWubxvccXhwKOWJW/JOxWYhKVTgH1LNL65vgX3Y4=; h=Feedback-ID:Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date; Feedback-ID: 20115:3760:null:purelymail X-Pm-Original-To: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org Received: by smtp.purelymail.com (Purelymail SMTP) with ESMTPSA id 334401819; (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384); Sat, 18 Jan 2025 12:04:05 +0000 (UTC) Received: by zephyr.silentflame.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 609A3949F2E; Sat, 18 Jan 2025 12:04:04 +0000 (GMT) From: Sean Whitton To: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; and-let* is useless In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier via's message of "Fri, 17 Jan 2025 10:39:45 -0500") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87sess3g4m.fsf@web.de> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2025 12:04:04 +0000 Message-ID: <874j1w2urv.fsf@zephyr.silentflame.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: Michael Heerdegen , Stefan Monnier X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hello, On Fri 17 Jan 2025 at 10:39am -05, Stefan Monnier via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" wrote: >> Right. The Lisp convention of using `when' for pure control flow and >> `and' for returning values is a good aid to readability. > > AFAIK this convention is followed only by some coders, so it doesn't > help readability because you can't rely on it. But it might be specified by an ELPA project's coding style guide, or you might know that an Emacs subsystem maintainer always uses it and asks for it in patch reviews. As it's a readability aid, it doesn't have to be used absolutely everywhere to be useful. >> If we don't have and-let*, then we can't use this convention in the case >> that we also want to bind variables. > > Then again, we don't have such a "value returning vs not" duplication > and associated convention for `let`, `progn`, `lambda`, > `unwind-protect`, `catch`, `condition-case, ... > > The fact we have all three of if/when/and is not a good justification > for `and-let*`. I think you are letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, in your thinking, here. -- Sean Whitton From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Jan 18 09:15:49 2025 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Jan 2025 14:15:49 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40756 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tZ9c4-0001qg-OU for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 18 Jan 2025 09:15:49 -0500 Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:7391) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tZ9c1-0001qG-Bh for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 18 Jan 2025 09:15:46 -0500 Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id E028B440A0B; Sat, 18 Jan 2025 09:15:35 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1737209734; bh=T8rRl7jAHCeAcHFaDCW62LSP++OTPk/JKC31QpRT4f4=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=mDjeRq/eEMRjrNyLy9UbVF2xAr6NiHLlCMRs7zWDHS1qrvuuQOMdbO65sni/gIout 5qpouqmSpQjHA0GKDh/PSla0Kkz3aDOKoEec6qSEaYz+Z8kzq2uh2t2lsaeb2gsngz Rg7ysxtiT4D89w3EcFW8HLalvZLon199/Bx5JAYzsZTiIUzoskMykI3tbZhIskvNkP iHsYZPL7/4Hd4xkwDVNcv4S7tApaQudxSf6duGi/jkzPHy6w+WIKeMUU8JTmYt90Db Sb3cprlNgerAZJ72D6AC6A+QxZMJOzfTntSfYyQo7/+Z2Uf2smCeSFYlNWPaQpo+1O Itr+xPQYFU/4g== Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D0FEA44098B; Sat, 18 Jan 2025 09:15:34 -0500 (EST) Received: from alfajor (104-195-232-86.cpe.teksavvy.com [104.195.232.86]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9CE1A1208BA; Sat, 18 Jan 2025 09:15:34 -0500 (EST) From: Stefan Monnier To: Sean Whitton Subject: Re: bug#73853: 31.0.50; and-let* is useless In-Reply-To: <874j1w2urv.fsf@zephyr.silentflame.com> (Sean Whitton's message of "Sat, 18 Jan 2025 12:04:04 +0000") Message-ID: References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87sess3g4m.fsf@web.de> <874j1w2urv.fsf@zephyr.silentflame.com> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2025 09:15:33 -0500 User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-SPAM-INFO: Spam detection results: 0 ALL_TRUSTED -1 Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP AWL -0.003 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain DKIM_VALID_EF -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from domain X-SPAM-LEVEL: X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: Michael Heerdegen , 73853@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > As it's a readability aid, it doesn't have to be used absolutely > everywhere to be useful. For if/when/and there are *other* reasons to have those three (e.g. a 4-way `and` becomes much more indented&ugly when replaced by ifs/whens), so since we have them and since they overlap in many cases, it can make sense for people to try and convey the intention of their code by choosing one over the other when they can be used interchangeably. But this extra intention information was never the reason to have all three. For `and-let` vs `when-let` there is no other reason to have both: every `and-let*` can be replaced by a `when-let*` with virtually no difference (and in practice all `and-let*` I ever found could similarly be replaced by an `if-let*`), other than this act of conveying an intention. > I think you are letting the perfect be the enemy of the good, in your > thinking, here. No, I'm trying to argue that `and-let*` is useful only because it exists, whereas I think we should limit ourselves to things which exist because they're useful. If we had an alias of `let` called, say, `do` that behaved exactly the same, people would likely be tempted to use it to convey the idea that it doesn't return a value. And then if I were to point out it's useless I'd apparently see the exact same resistance I'm getting now. Stefan From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Jan 18 20:40:44 2025 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 19 Jan 2025 01:40:44 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44299 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tZKIt-000559-Ks for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 18 Jan 2025 20:40:44 -0500 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.17.11]:55821) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tZKIr-00054k-B9 for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 18 Jan 2025 20:40:42 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=web.de; s=s29768273; t=1737250830; x=1737855630; i=michael_heerdegen@web.de; bh=BIoUcgcS3PueXcK5ub0P8bCyMUJFglreBxeSL5qj0aI=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date: Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:cc:content-transfer-encoding: content-type:date:from:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject: to; b=u8YeakKQ6c4IAyamwTYM9AvwTMxXIMzPa6ZW7W3BhuWnDeGKZaHgouvdx0vEE46T nECJFfDODX5g/bhYdQ7WqmBy4cOULCflYH38aAtfyZoeXIJRS8fzNDYJ9oIFInFJD G8MOKMOpVE275Sr4YM7uGCzycQwDCVA5fKGKzUKlnGtfe0Hk/DbdClCGqFVi+3Sbv 75KIcYDOk5MYQNxZFF4XsfGR1Gp7CwQ9tNhfhLO+MHibfPFFdBNYfrdXmFs6tsG7Y JyHFQ0SsAMvBpjxuyumslHnULCUHQ+T595bp1IwwNUywOFfphwAv0juGmk92MUZ9N Njb9oN53PHwuqsQErg== X-UI-Sender-Class: 814a7b36-bfc1-4dae-8640-3722d8ec6cd6 Received: from drachen.dragon ([92.75.138.197]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb106 [213.165.67.124]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MLAVc-1trPPo2mlm-00OhPu; Sun, 19 Jan 2025 02:40:30 +0100 From: Michael Heerdegen To: Stefan Monnier Subject: Re: bug#73853: Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Fri, 17 Jan 2025 21:31:45 -0500") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87sess3g4m.fsf@web.de> <87jzathsqj.fsf_-_@web.de> Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2025 02:41:46 +0100 Message-ID: <877c6rshph.fsf@web.de> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:Y6o/Bu+LfrCXQSEz+ed5uMVyUO+A1a0b5VfESdMVSFEAIihH2a2 D2B5zFYLmY0IKYwEhbBC8Y4sT/zpstAZm74s3Vfzv1HajbycyEhiuZAAwiNhpMFiSYKmfOa sLSxTZbQ6tAJphoabmP56OJ+M8jOCOsSNNFSGNqIRaee3ypCxMW8jRHfPMgEMF1u/zaBFMg BFepGrumLimDpgfTtOjmQ== X-Spam-Flag: NO UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:YH+1AhXkJXE=;eKt08e3QoMdpYPdajz2oMvSyPJc xoFcK1hh2mrhET7sxmDt91d17M+sFHoamU/Bc0dk7U83kwyhhd+bZF473K+MNGdeUxhTsMNZ3 fPCu61wH2vkVVy8Z1HWqcOSESa9SrMCgGt+Nf2qH/6h4WpqhOjV/8hSjvp6QkaaZ2d4rNEn6H eVoA/ZoaL365QhviLsvGk1qu22yKPq+TxUL09dhjCYKJQsBi2OYdvvAMCz+zwJCzpgbj5V41M JpDma4H+atfXuzliM5hiriVeOfsEpievYreJ8LmrAYBjkhE9ja5NVIsyqmTnXktqjDKSmssJg wCYxnug4PMNPfkSk3WZWHLhs74W5YpuqJGGRfdhf0fR1eQJAy1vI3au3JAarNDGpvi1ir6IKs NcqlKzZJsuLHQZ0tsOnFR+uH1y66ClmLLpQWNdnLCJ7uNrjIw78ztpggFsF8LKtTRBL5G3TtC zADPu4WDV/x67WlGLKVMmI/m8KamlS7ZoG5KcruqEXIcfQefXBn4dQ02v3l7CZ3R8DGzZmJJd pgLNg5eS6p/cEQ5h23y/GQYdrOJF9VCx+U2AKPHBtuvhU2llT+c4nGjcZ7TDbQQ0AJTNUCIlO TZjJg8sA66VBUea0o2VvZKXLwN/hmcAhZ9WiE82S8I/UA4kYDp3VguulVP6Yby4g4DPLAPhvl 17gypBk126u2t40UUs1fQIRa/77PeAGwBRecqaYRNVJ1yZZTLT3A/3xXi6BIXdKHY4EZRTCW5 uHeCAXEfBRFdDKmAIJqC+FjNMQpf5rhmUtSz3UYSPzK0YA3K1lm8reCek7FjYH/VocyqzZIn9 f2JqzIMFdJgCsT5uQ3Mkdsiv4nqIhiwYWiHP/nwEP/2g5rjYHqg9uzKiQZYI1tFRv1X/d+xhd kHE1yA4PSJ5qakfg52EgrV3jXhJiEWUm27a7rGBfeX0P35oH6E/PtxRkgJl1mXVi8REscLPL9 kAb0mR08iLWiiHEe2zguksrCNxwZZo1MhMlnpgEQEVScFEbdB4T8leu61rjYaQh51K7D8ZX97 mH3KzLF4dHko7OuCLTZCFbG14Vs5k06wphPVOyikTOgtczRMk8tHAiznxXxybSmZjbtfTwmEJ Kc++dl9YVbDWeOFOo/STiSlw6+62rvOdhkwzxR18H9m5ax4UyqIXPkWEk6NjeNuQ0+GAachHZ YW1SZDNwuUuaC16/592P99m1PBhQnLVHgC5Lfy3Ijjw== X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org, Sean Whitton X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Stefan Monnier writes: > My argument is not that it's a bad convention. Instead I'm arguing > that the supposed benefit of this convention doesn't really apply because > it's not obeyed widely enough. Lots of conventions are not obeyed widely. If you (I mean Stefan M.) do care about them you use to change the occurrences. One goal when designing the language is that its constructs suggest a good style. Sometimes people need to be reminded, as you know, think of quoted lambdas, `point-min' etc. So I am still not convinced by this argument, and I think in a similar other case it would not convince you as well. > >> Then again, we don't have such a "value returning vs not" duplication > >> and associated convention for `let`, `progn`, `lambda`, > >> `unwind-protect`, `catch`, `condition-case, ... > >> > >> The fact we have all three of if/when/and is not a good justification > >> for `and-let*`. > > > > if/when/let are a bit different than the constructs in your list because > > the values in conditionals have different semantics when interpreted as > > a conditional than as an value or object. This is part of the reason. > > I don't see the "different semantics" you're alluding to, I'm afraid. > Can you explain what you mean? The constructs you mentioned evaluate a sequence of expressions or create bindings etc. `if-let' and `when-let' are conditionals, the first argument is a condition, interpreted as boolean. Second, `and-let' is something that _returns_ a "condition value", a boolean. Therefore, the return value is also always significant. OTOH, `when-let' executes expressions when some condition(s) are met. The return value is not significant most of the time, but in particular not when the condition was not met. To rely on the implicit `nil' return value of `when-let' to use it in a condition is not good style IMHO. Like relying on the nil return value of `while'. You can do it and "it's clear" but I hate it. Ok? > It wouldn't change anything to the readability of the code, AFAICT. > In both cases the preceding `if` makes it immediately clear that we're > interested in the final return value but only in whether it's nil > or not. Well, it does for me. "It's obvious" or "its clear" is the way to less readable code. You replace a syntax where it is clear that the result is a boolean with one where the meaning is context dependent. Exactly this is one of the things that worsen readability: the meaning of an expression is not clear per se but becomes only clear by looking at the outer context. So, if `and-let' would be removed I would replace it with either (if-let (TESTS...) BOOL-EXP nil) or (let (VARS) (and (setq VAR1 TEST1) ...)). If this is so much better for users like you I don't know. It's surely still worse for me. There is a third option btw: remove `when-let' instead of `and-let'. Since `when-let' is mostly `if-let' with a only a tiny difference that doesn't let you do anything new...people not really obey using `when' when there is no "else"...it's so similar to `and-let'... most of your arguments are transferable 1:1. Michael. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Jan 18 22:31:15 2025 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 19 Jan 2025 03:31:15 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44397 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tZM1q-0001wC-QM for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 18 Jan 2025 22:31:15 -0500 Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:61702) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tZM1o-0001vv-3j for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 18 Jan 2025 22:31:13 -0500 Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id E4D8D100154; Sat, 18 Jan 2025 22:30:58 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1737257457; bh=nlnPINTLN0KaDvybdt0iyGHPAeMkdKMzvGlv/PGGOnQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=WtaPrt9T5ab62uWb+vC2kk56nw/dXY6JqiyZEMW6ghTNNWJI9GoIz5Y06d8mmbM/8 PIHfrMiZvC/4qIGA6yHr5104DVC9fTCAf6Z/iVtiAdyBg8FT4nvjWTVkfb0DNWJV4q juCNcm7HFqVpImJdrHsD7ezOMfG64cf21s874IsndVWCRJ8yX6C2YM77hR46O5tYyE K88/MK+/aH7K4IRk8Pf3qvvTZy19dT1QDNROrKNcM4f3bI23TxwIFck645q2hVkFNZ oHa0uqPE/fBXTPRJgYwzoeJB0+k886EzI5xBwhYYpm+Dm+JH8GUgU2L569a4EdSu8D U076rYu07QBkg== Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D4201100051; Sat, 18 Jan 2025 22:30:57 -0500 (EST) Received: from alfajor (104-195-232-86.cpe.teksavvy.com [104.195.232.86]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A0D7F12076B; Sat, 18 Jan 2025 22:30:57 -0500 (EST) From: Stefan Monnier To: Michael Heerdegen Subject: Re: bug#73853: Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: <877c6rshph.fsf@web.de> (Michael Heerdegen's message of "Sun, 19 Jan 2025 02:41:46 +0100") Message-ID: References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87sess3g4m.fsf@web.de> <87jzathsqj.fsf_-_@web.de> <877c6rshph.fsf@web.de> Date: Sat, 18 Jan 2025 22:30:56 -0500 User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-SPAM-INFO: Spam detection results: 0 ALL_TRUSTED -1 Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP AWL -0.080 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain DKIM_VALID_EF -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from domain X-SPAM-LEVEL: X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org, Sean Whitton X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > OTOH, `when-let' executes expressions when some condition(s) are met. > The return value is not significant most of the time, but in particular > not when the condition was not met. [ I can't think if a situation where the return value would be significant when the condition is true but not when it's not. Either the context uses the return value or it doesn't, AFAIK. It's rather unusual for the context to use it in a way that depends on the condition (it would require the context to make a similar and thus somewhat redundant test). ] > To rely on the implicit `nil' return value of `when-let' to use it in > a condition is not good style IMHO. Like relying on the nil return > value of `while'. You can do it and "it's clear" but I hate it. Ok? That goes back to my earlier question: what makes `and/when/if-let` so different from `ignore-errors` and so many other constructs. > So, if `and-let' would be removed I would replace it with either > (if-let (TESTS...) BOOL-EXP nil) or > (let (VARS) (and (setq VAR1 TEST1) ...)). Fine by me. > If this is so much better for users like you I don't know. > It's surely still worse for me. Then write it with `when-let` and get used to the idea that it returns a value, because... well, it does and code out there relies on it (a small random sampling suggests that around 15% of the existing uses in Emacs do). > There is a third option btw: remove `when-let' instead of `and-let'. `grep` suggests that will not be popular. At least in Emacs + (Non)GNU ELPA, we're talking 233 vs 3093. > Since `when-let' is mostly `if-let' with a only a tiny difference that > doesn't let you do anything new...people not really obey using `when' > when there is no "else"...it's so similar to `and-let'... most of your > arguments are transferable 1:1. I don't have a strong preference either way. I just know that they're redundant and would rather see one of the two disappear. If none of them can't be removed, I'd actually prefer them to be actual aliases of each other, so at least ELisp non-specialists don't need to learn the subtle differences between the two. Stefan From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Jan 18 23:44:27 2025 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 19 Jan 2025 04:44:27 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44466 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tZNAg-0005TM-Ug for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 18 Jan 2025 23:44:27 -0500 Received: from mout.web.de ([217.72.192.78]:40115) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tZNAd-0005T5-Th for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 18 Jan 2025 23:44:25 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=web.de; s=s29768273; t=1737261853; x=1737866653; i=michael_heerdegen@web.de; bh=zgO7Vilc+pS8m3xjmA4SxP8C55M3XMeSc6llyHR7aDQ=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date: Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:cc:content-transfer-encoding: content-type:date:from:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject: to; b=BDiqxK3n2zFlykxdChmFtuRr7KNuHjQKQabz3g+RxJPG66KZzMdxBBZE7FaswnEX gh/ajT79jVg7Y1npwDFaDn5iUHFleInEwl8YCA4cEyggo2GFXY/hCGsjv1llLUMxe uu2NBwWmdHbW8O6vBalNjwX6o1YBRyAQDy+7pEXq4Et3QV04iRn2g8s0ubRzZRqw4 4Zp7J5MQzJU0GFFaT5EysvKRbymkRZJMMUrK0mzGW7gr8FsNxYxJkmZmwJGu68eH2 Zg16+9X7YJzfN1ZAHywD0qIfTZtiZXIIHwRdhilZy452HsMHrCv6C7gFj/Z7k//TH MleFpQnBQkpKW2s4Tw== X-UI-Sender-Class: 814a7b36-bfc1-4dae-8640-3722d8ec6cd6 Received: from drachen.dragon ([92.75.138.197]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb105 [213.165.67.124]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1MKMA1-1toZjX3jB9-00KmTX; Sun, 19 Jan 2025 05:44:12 +0100 From: Michael Heerdegen To: Stefan Monnier Subject: Re: bug#73853: Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Sat, 18 Jan 2025 22:30:56 -0500") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87sess3g4m.fsf@web.de> <87jzathsqj.fsf_-_@web.de> <877c6rshph.fsf@web.de> Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2025 05:45:28 +0100 Message-ID: <87ldv7v2c7.fsf@web.de> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:l8117zgpYe86Xr4A0Qg43jbEj83t2BLMu4Vi1XoacyP3D9wzYMD Fb2zZcGmxegpkN50Q6Hf+9/dh+wFfuaLKZW2ahOedOpoRXo+GCx3w/69Yw3kLlai8zTUuLe SaQTtGE1vvzyHAqTf11MRVO9g84Wp/FEkb/eg2Jw7+IFN1sCgeG+IAiy3oxyj4iNE4Yk5+f UMXrQe4nK77B8yjB7iU6g== X-Spam-Flag: NO UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:sB84jZ56EMM=;meqaq36bMAYiWR1Yxi1I26B21Fj XH3IAKvf83YvSCl5Y+hj5VGespMJN+VJYIovPRLa98hv/6OupxKvuatC/yC3gcaByA//fIVrE LJisk/2rIoDUeRHJjTI+jV6hR7d4M3fdD59Y1Jg3Ujyy0gk7MsEuXy5QQo4Y/vg5X9xWZpMHI W5R+tnbzpR9xXSZo/bQSg1Jjcre3lwz/V4bjPG9H1adx8kAKHA8JYoj407QB8weO5+DSZJRSj 4uFpgmLWLom5x46Pvwxvz5Rzv/IZzGYWsM3f2NDKCdJyki2YiMgSA3TZsS9mbom8pdWo3wfNR aiCvFNw2wdVAita61bqZO28SdC1hB3kJoJ2t/LGeklsdxqANTMWHeniqBa10sJXtIzOEixcfd /B1m+s0sFlFhaJr3zFH/ZLrujZfuLIO49pQ8sJpkMTyN4yHHu6eVXFjYMpZe8e+efESsI7SEe vDKFWSTzDnv2sz6WKbPYfQo1PgSgIzlh2gCbY8O5gm/IJynvcQYxh5clB4M2VzkBkRgagq35b P/XD/VNZE2yy26hCVP4hIhGrJOWt/6zfgKZCOgQ3ihH3kD/Qs6GxqnvuoogdlOGvolBhmaVXn cr+6BwAdNLF79gzCCtrHgmdMJp5wap9h9cdt8fbPV8Jv4jEEX/OlXZdEPYmGRMht9UTNlQ9K7 B1U4kQBDMClEXO3X6QdqFDrBx7RBQMZ7XzirSJHRwXuAP7+V8JhUfuq/lgVtfI907NxudryYY t5FH545kvadSu02JzVB3qWiHND0wNs5HzZ0P7MuwkeSSMSVHDG9J/nMm61LIAGAkQDB38XvVW hK/Umr/uHleBwyVvB7GoL74YgQ7sbTNbfngfSySEZyHn4MAOA1YBO+Y6k9x6e0CbA8pCtKWam lAR00OOzTIyrf+rJgclz7CxAoo3kIJXNp5kVeUuRpMUgq91aqCWzhmop4F6lVrzpwSdoCxaMm fWeRIMuxsgA0azB+Hb58Du7gpWoxnjqBz2OVnYr1tyGdjmchBLxf4vsXvfY1IvQGgLXtWoxuu mcmkkTstvdxUqErZmRRakW3O7pE8sj33nZqPeXTuf0K6LEYpJAL2s5uz5lXXl/zGKGR7nPvqa gsec808V6VJ07CIDppkHaHuxOAQ/1yB9kzDQE7g4piWQ5/Gupwn8SrYKQwfTo4qWiCdoz7c5a kiWvpGVOcu45UaMb5En3EXOYOV9svSfPC8Gqa0Zz0wg== X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org, Sean Whitton X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.7 (-) Stefan Monnier writes: > Then write it with `when-let` and get used to the idea that it returns > a value, because... well, it does and code out there relies on it (a > small random sampling suggests that around 15% of the existing uses in > Emacs do). But Stefan, if we replace calls of `and-let' with `when-let', I would not only have to get used to the idea "that it returns a value", but I also would have to remember what happens when `when-let' is used as a condition (e.g. in an `if') with an empty body. I would always ask: which of the semantics did we choose again...? This is not better than what you currently dislike. I would then have to remember and consult the doc instead of you. It seems a bit that you assume that I can remember things with much less effort than you. I mean, there is only one "subtle difference" between `and-let' and `when-let' - the handling of an empty body - right? Isn't it absolutely "clear" what an empty body means in both cases? > > There is a third option btw: remove `when-let' instead of `and-let'. > `grep` suggests that will not be popular. > At least in Emacs + (Non)GNU ELPA, we're talking 233 vs 3093. That may be and is expected. But with `and-let*' semantics we could keep 233+3093 but with `when-let*' semantics we would probably only keep 3093 or replace some of the 233 with something which is harder to read. The real question is: which of the semantics is more popular when you have no choice. A completely different question that you bring up when you want to remove one. Michael. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sun Jan 19 00:07:33 2025 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 19 Jan 2025 05:07:33 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44485 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tZNX3-0006dq-5U for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 19 Jan 2025 00:07:33 -0500 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.17.11]:34515) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tZNX0-0006db-LQ for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 19 Jan 2025 00:07:31 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=web.de; s=s29768273; t=1737263240; x=1737868040; i=michael_heerdegen@web.de; bh=5PeStM/cDUV/88eGDmwne2wBGGcJasiffP2QGP1gaQE=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date: Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:cc:content-transfer-encoding: content-type:date:from:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject: to; b=ThpD88t+4tnhJGjHThEWCWL5tAgZnflsE/wP9uqH10popsId6Nxo0ZhBG7eZXda9 HZRTPZ5lYKDcWkufENby2UhMaiSu/KWY7jhrf1pyfvmCi+uQSONvDId8z6klZQEe7 DFcQziAUp/4eKIO1AZti/bvfaZ/Ulx/RYBXry+TWtFgmGCIoJyYIGx3b+j+SWEEg4 9BwgD79nnAr9LojNFNLZNcdX3/TmnN/2SVMm/t5m/RJxoq4H8xrj5KFl8w8w6IjAG FjVPh8i8MCqZdJWH/fWpHqepi5nOcDa6W4SsELHRHPd284ExCrWImX+EFN+kgn0SU NGguiRLSRbXYJi3iBg== X-UI-Sender-Class: 814a7b36-bfc1-4dae-8640-3722d8ec6cd6 Received: from drachen.dragon ([92.75.138.197]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb105 [213.165.67.124]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1N7xeb-1tVn1X1kkV-015xoD; Sun, 19 Jan 2025 06:07:20 +0100 From: Michael Heerdegen To: Stefan Monnier Subject: Re: bug#73853: Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Sat, 18 Jan 2025 22:30:56 -0500") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87sess3g4m.fsf@web.de> <87jzathsqj.fsf_-_@web.de> <877c6rshph.fsf@web.de> Date: Sun, 19 Jan 2025 06:08:37 +0100 Message-ID: <87h65vv19m.fsf@web.de> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:vlwcmnRgQje+cjeX7t/7GfFZ5h3rn1/XG9jNI3qFrfW0Va0+CBQ rXQTlZuGxp/CIcIEbIsZ1pFyXymV9UqxKsALNpsKuzKzJWmsHbz4OFnbdbakS2qqSSZKx0l 60Fkoni1aATnW9k5A5vu5XIe5D5YCI+PvP8yTf3sHqn/nVEECQAhrM96YDj8/tf7Hg9lQH0 EoE1TyKmMQ5WjUw1tN0dQ== X-Spam-Flag: NO UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:j67TZJHTvfM=;tGocktxPdyKFOL3klPt8lVQt7la hP6ovIBpi/DmRJJvvcgsEENjrzLMZRM3En+NDEI4sN2GH1k9pogk67fBKqplHFs0KrsI8wt47 E9NwP3nQTW3YUkKjcVjGMr+l9MqaY1qLFzXSaSjZrPP7kBoHAi/0ZkughQaG2co/kLeNplhD8 yJk8xCUS0ZFaGgp/dBU/XDzuPOiQtCVDy4RD3S7hQOuj14TRPsbw207b3ki63rIZGHsLnPFN9 h9TA2BIT2KwsKyjsTy6Wba/O3MEWmBOI3yur5qMcgp3ebJ7DVnFjrVjAiSjISlN0bPXDkpf0u T47nQzrjIjIyqMhsrj97Xrsw4G7IBb8poQPQjbi4k/vzGJSmrwICgKi2Qf0tUzYP5mgM05gRP FtK9lSPtvhMXi8C3xRw8pkcQq9YcIboUt2vMZvpHUR8Ot+wFqtfuxIizi583yxo6SA38mpSmN +hDbsXWVZN5AoSOdG1UcJKXEJvRJNNoPOCslbTdO9Lzk+sYHa/lz+QNQ/PwODcBP/dLaMjuSc aAHPH1ypnYOrKSdIsv/B9wLQdZ3l7TSNEy9ej1wG2xCYi1np7xRnDsui7j1HbT6okE3Z5RvLi VZqp4b8dZw9uwzqq+Hkey/H85DX0DLQ3OQioP4Al1gzzQhhS0kXT+L9CbL44pSVyneZlgDdcu LkFTsv4BLQIP+GHYF35op12tRx8/5j7IB34Ana+keJVJeXiM9KwIsYJPnvsXX8oDXWUSyzlvB 68xBElpWozafMC2cRD6WPSnN6DiabfEAAoJyWE/AacnS2wH7CVf4eA03aLFBXDgYV1GDjn3dh kHybmoNR+a5i5cjn/QYBdv+2VYztn5Bmkq33nNm/T9jeRIjO4wbqZk2iTRIoDCbofpL/EsWpU Zw7xTxtJbUTKxd4UfxqWtTvLAFBwbyilPpfZMyOwAEjPzJhgOCtcIynyl9UID8Tm8xqVsNrHi C9aKtbAB4z1dw1kkpuFYkbN7bO0S+7RS5Uhx/eBMy3Baz/dLmR8cNoUhbpA6DDvxlXkrb1AzI +J0PI6pgI3exfYBXMrtLi53TcNCBotFQNdMPKk6Wfh5VR6XpnqQ/7hum8hwTnIIVQnrgM33Dc hu7DK/4cl/a1hIgOrcdXhkpgPrcf4riu+fRV1WtQG2JaBWE6KMx0GLmKZUrmkrhiIOuQISP8b 56f/WxAZ2UhZ6tdhmyEzH2gzfhoQiaFaC6qBJuq0Jbg== X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org, Sean Whitton X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Stefan Monnier writes: > That goes back to my earlier question: what makes `and/when/if-let` so > different from `ignore-errors` and so many other constructs. What makes `pcase's let/app/pred/guard different from and/when/if-let? There is likewise lots of redundancy, and the subtle differences are hard to grasp and remember for a lot of people. Would you remove the two least used ones? I also still remember your reaction when I had used a let pattern to do destructuring with combined testing and you meant that it was not designed for it and would be weird. Because you associated a semantic with it that was not necessarily implied for me. So isn't your personal taste in this case here relevant too, for what you want to do? Michael. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Tue Jan 21 19:08:43 2025 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Jan 2025 00:08:43 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58216 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1taOIU-0008Nt-LU for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 21 Jan 2025 19:08:43 -0500 Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:24733) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1taOIQ-0008NP-Sp for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 21 Jan 2025 19:08:39 -0500 Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 4F94E442DE8; Tue, 21 Jan 2025 19:08:31 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1737504509; bh=e2H/4BkFtCPdEgN1072R9waF9E0NISh+s02iCS2pI9Q=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=fnM5Gki9dIjuRY/N0eMSW4CzM1INuVHGdMXG+BeVkfA+EzXSkRgd5T0BF9HUBrGR/ vFwHqUih3HmGWJUGhS3jZn56igwnJ6r6G+qx+dp3d8FJPpBlZQrv6acmcizhz/+QKq G4wPY13SE+zXG2KLqXuDwEZcwuNM+AKeDq+f7m1DSU2GNYiQNDaxBKJyiBO1V8b+ky eXGNhOlo+pY7Wwd5zuTx3uxHrpr5/XK5noz10E/t3Q4lI5e3K4kmg1uLAanXWQ9eDn vTME5tESaTNGGx3OJAzrJLGU4A8EccbHJfvnYleWgBPNWE8g5uAXDdIkKnJJDTQ8KX lRQ+BpG+98twQ== Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id BD203442DED; Tue, 21 Jan 2025 19:08:29 -0500 (EST) Received: from asado (dyn.144-85-147-102.dsl.vtx.ch [144.85.147.102]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D063C120682; Tue, 21 Jan 2025 19:08:28 -0500 (EST) From: Stefan Monnier To: Michael Heerdegen Subject: Re: bug#73853: Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: <87ldv7v2c7.fsf@web.de> (Michael Heerdegen's message of "Sun, 19 Jan 2025 05:45:28 +0100") Message-ID: References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87sess3g4m.fsf@web.de> <87jzathsqj.fsf_-_@web.de> <877c6rshph.fsf@web.de> <87ldv7v2c7.fsf@web.de> Date: Tue, 21 Jan 2025 19:08:26 -0500 User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-SPAM-INFO: Spam detection results: 0 ALL_TRUSTED -1 Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP AWL 0.184 Adjusted score from AWL reputation of From: address BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1% DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature, not necessarily valid DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's domain DKIM_VALID_EF -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from domain X-SPAM-LEVEL: X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org, Sean Whitton X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) >> Then write it with `when-let` and get used to the idea that it returns >> a value, because... well, it does and code out there relies on it (a >> small random sampling suggests that around 15% of the existing uses in >> Emacs do). > But Stefan, if we replace calls of `and-let' with `when-let', I would > not only have to get used to the idea "that it returns a value", but I > also would have to remember what happens when `when-let' is used as a > condition (e.g. in an `if') with an empty body. Of course, the same happens as happens in any other position. This is a general rule in pretty much all programming languages: the evaluation is performed in the same way regardless on the context where that expression is used. > I would always ask: which of the semantics did we choose again...? That's easy to fix: disallow or strongly discourage empty bodies. We already do that in various places and it would be very natural to do that in `when-let*` as well. Currently in Emacs itself, `grep` finds 681 uses of `when-let(*)` and only one of them has an empty body (and I'd argue it's an error: the last "binding" is `((push finext extlist-new))` which macro expands to something silly; not sure if the bytecompiler manages to unsillify the code). The score is a bit less one-sided for `and-let*` where I count 25 empty bodies among 140 uses (the vast majority of them in ERC and Tramp). Also, it's easier to remember the answer if you have to remember it only for `when-let*` rather than having to remember it for both `and-let*` and `when-let*`. Incidentally, `and-let*` is member of a rather small club of forms where en empty body is not treated as a body that returns nil. I was able to remember only 3 other forms that have this property (one of which is never used, AFAICT). I don't think forms should wear this property as a badge of honor. > This is not better than what you currently dislike. I would then have > to remember and consult the doc instead of you. It seems a bit that > you assume that I can remember things with much less effort than you. The rule is easy: an empty body returns nil. It applies to *almost* all ELisp forms that include a "body" (i.e. a list of forms). > I mean, there is only one "subtle difference" between `and-let' and > `when-let' - the handling of an empty body - right? Isn't it absolutely > "clear" what an empty body means in both cases? [ Given the fact that in almost all other cases an empty body returns nil, I wouldn't say it's "absolutely clear" for `and-let*`, no. ] Michael Heerdegen [2025-01-19 06:08:37] wrote: > What makes `pcase's let/app/pred/guard different from and/when/if-let? The differences between let/app/pred/guard and comparable to the differences between if/when/and/unless/cond: you can fairly easily get each one from (some of) the others, but it's not mere renaming, so there's a tradeoff because of code size/verbosity (and also ease of optimization, tho to a minor degree). In the case of `and-let*`, it seems the tradeoff is not code size nor verbosity, but only a reluctance by some developers to rely on `when(-let)`s return value, even tho it's documented/reliable. So maybe instead of converting `and-let*` to `when-let*` we should recommend converting them to `if-let*`, where I don't think anyone has ever expressed an expectation that `if(-let)` doesn't return a value or that it's unclear what value it would return if the (else) body is empty. [ A quick search suggests there are very few uses (I could find only 4 in Emacs) of `and-let*` with a body containing more than one form. ] > There is likewise lots of redundancy, and the subtle differences are > hard to grasp and remember for a lot of people. Would you remove the > two least used ones? I've been tempted to do that, but they're used often enough and the rewrite is sufficiently more verbose that I've kept them so far. > So isn't your personal taste in this case here relevant too, for what > you want to do? Definitely. I did not intend to imply otherwise. Stefan From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Jan 22 20:59:56 2025 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Jan 2025 01:59:56 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38106 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tamVf-0001uf-MH for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 22 Jan 2025 20:59:56 -0500 Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.17.12]:40137) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tamVa-0001u8-7l for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 22 Jan 2025 20:59:52 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=web.de; s=s29768273; t=1737597582; x=1738202382; i=michael_heerdegen@web.de; bh=5od7qvKMxEeNoeoqJ09UA+MHxGrSRgBPJbw0Qc0zKM4=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date: Message-ID:MIME-Version:Content-Type:cc:content-transfer-encoding: content-type:date:from:message-id:mime-version:reply-to:subject: to; b=t1YyoGVaOEpyPsQzvOppVTp970adFNh7dLMA0Y/PEmblpKkn1DumJaJn66S0FzXK Zb6cl7EUZ78RDWj0sge2hNLP/DG+eWIxKUJWaTz0KHuxcnTyqBPckLijejICyMDW0 Jb6DIvjKrBt4OhPZptpPASX2YUQCIiUnUZu1kIf1FqSjkgr+TehVyKSoEoqMZ8iwv 2cnCZUtpabGTPHim1K5GYR8hoR25q/YMJloZdSlkESJPcaSwjouHjdbFQTVSBJ/9J +SYxChMqVtOGTF+pKBy7XSAO2NNUwDs2OmCpRJGq9UqYK27mrTmKW1KA/nHMqfT14 Q1K9Y1EJn9OcpQ2Zew== X-UI-Sender-Class: 814a7b36-bfc1-4dae-8640-3722d8ec6cd6 Received: from drachen.dragon ([92.75.138.251]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb106 [213.165.67.124]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 1M9qd5-1tXEGu49Kv-003zaw; Thu, 23 Jan 2025 02:59:42 +0100 From: Michael Heerdegen To: Stefan Monnier Subject: Re: bug#73853: Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Tue, 21 Jan 2025 19:08:26 -0500") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87sess3g4m.fsf@web.de> <87jzathsqj.fsf_-_@web.de> <877c6rshph.fsf@web.de> <87ldv7v2c7.fsf@web.de> Date: Thu, 23 Jan 2025 03:00:58 +0100 Message-ID: <871pwu2srp.fsf@web.de> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:ZUbKQ2wVN9VpJqigAJWEjN/bNK3N40yVfHiZqJo8zCynFS/7NRF Xw9jJuzvHoUbtnVGtILDhiZPr7nk3qoF0/NzqLxqoN4cXNgq+MYSxLe5g9lxJ3ewR79ZWpt 8fTbXowspJbMwjabtBwpftRFPfTAsTg8zyg7D1f1S4hyag/mkxS6Q8wdaYEfOS5FvmSa23j hCA2InNZKS4//qOMOYqDA== X-Spam-Flag: NO UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:x6ylnNEQe14=;OMIpc++RieXjz5exD03V041xjFL O6UIoVl5UBA6pig9MI0Kxf4izMdd1kOaibO/2eFVVFErxzG3LbubaJm9v+oYz4mUtOuyU/GhG hVI4CVqMSVzSF70V225/wou9zDLhd6Tv4Lscz596m1q9PcTSoIdFG9gwn8drwE/QaBCR/OX1B Mcu4NPzeU3s9HV+yj2Ma5SDcBYBXCl7Cfdp7lTPgqfiWnKOIyUneGaGm+t5ZmOokopeRMklpL octIUV6ZUkJvbNr806CAt9VGPlLGSuagKa5GIC7TIpBRA7arCwefS1rF2uU1/EHES8Vo41a2W 3JJ8cfbn67d6Lxur+aH88bp0PtirxClzFl+OAwru+OfSAXmPsakRGf8vzMZ28xrZCcU+178oT 8lFLgnTZCVmQC/lSC4zPi2EPsmnzWleGXjENf53R2yOksju+cykBhhRk5YZ12TIpo/Y3PXcq3 LvRCJI6jt4BfCUiCjcGFX9jFiMbb6G/4wv/gNTC6NYxvMsGS+j3W6lcVHkurA+FiPToem0Ow6 ve2xNmREQODQpt8XnFEcDaMgO2C9/eQsu33+D85iEua9b1WF7hjXaeZrwn9FpGPMKJwyvYzIz 8VSoMWzoVUgCfy3CMElS68x6IPjZh075oRLW+o89sZphBrc8ffT1ZBCsrjsGTX8I5yCvquA0s ZhMXFtK3zMfpv0PRSI1VdQXHTPNDtXXhlNobpS2dS9jUH3ei+3dlntMHnXpByObhROgu7IHfU HYuw/J5XGQRwLwMDgxIUwC15bsKsjX7XYHT/orK85d7Mdocap6R59lT8Mv76GRH81tip3I36D xfyaU9Yk3tdN1LbEOxy+KLQ4K2FMltQkXBmVkpHkQtnLPwsa7DL7Xg7AqvbWj5TgKCCSut/NE dFZQTLrOcvX3uxJ6TEG+0iLX5z7pPnpp3WDk97NvaGrwT44jL5+k7EDVanl7284Fxrw1BePjh flhjaID8CJao8CnPxLxCEdoHyHgRePMLkOXK/BJnGvdhoI4Vngdz1GKU0eB3v60rhpINLMr2O sc1HI0PFpBm6lgBMcShjvGTmV2/bbHyKUlMrVuTrPGKGIyHtCQMoQUBzAK2SgBkSFyLhijfro 5moLsVuZsm4yvZzgzs6ysBq71Pv5MsmlPD1/QPlPdrKpnzWYa8vqseJyxs7i+XAJlG70603Mq ZeMIouZwvT3ngg1qzdIDhPqHEHAw89XDR0tPZrZWiig== X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org, Sean Whitton X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Stefan Monnier writes: > > I would always ask: which of the semantics did we choose again...? > > That's easy to fix: disallow or strongly discourage empty bodies. > We already do that in various places and it would be very natural to do > that in `when-let*` as well. > Currently in Emacs itself, `grep` finds 681 uses of `when-let(*)` and > only one of them has an empty body (and I'd argue it's an error: the > last "binding" is `((push finext extlist-new))` which macro expands to > something silly; not sure if the bytecompiler manages to unsillify the > code). > The score is a bit less one-sided for `and-let*` where I count 25 empty > bodies among 140 uses (the vast majority of them in ERC and Tramp). This is my personal perspective but: `and-let*' doesn't have a body! It's final condition naturally doesn't need to be bound and thus can be put at the final position after the bindings. > Also, it's easier to remember the answer if you have to remember it only > for `when-let*` rather than having to remember it for both `and-let*` and > `when-let*`. I never had a problem to remember any of the semantics of those macros. They are natural. > Incidentally, `and-let*` is member of a rather small club of forms where > en empty body is not treated as a body that returns nil. I was able > to remember only 3 other forms that have this property (one of which is > never used, AFAICT). I don't think forms should wear this property as > a badge of honor. Yes, because it should not be seen as body, in my opinion. I would remove the &rest and make it an optional final statement. > In the case of `and-let*`, it seems the tradeoff is not code size nor > verbosity, but only a reluctance by some developers to rely on > `when(-let)`s return value, even tho it's documented/reliable. Please not without context: it's so because of the name and the semantics a `when' statement usually suggests. If this was Prolog I would see it differently. > So maybe instead of converting `and-let*` to `when-let*` we should > recommend converting them to `if-let*`, where I don't think anyone has > ever expressed an expectation that `if(-let)` doesn't return a value or > that it's unclear what value it would return if the (else) body is > empty. Well, I did think about it. If `if' or `if-let*' is used as a condition I would always specify THEN and (one) ELSE. But yes, definitely better than `when-let'. > > So isn't your personal taste in this case here relevant too, for what > > you want to do? > > Definitely. I did not intend to imply otherwise. Ok. But why do you think that your taste is the better one, then? Or shared by more people? Michael. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Fri Jan 24 07:05:28 2025 Received: (at 73853) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Jan 2025 12:05:28 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43965 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tbIRD-0001Uq-Ol for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 24 Jan 2025 07:05:28 -0500 Received: from sendmail.purelymail.com ([34.202.193.197]:36020) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1tbIRA-0001UZ-2c for 73853@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 24 Jan 2025 07:05:25 -0500 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=ofr3ayPhFAB5tXyAuAUZD+aRJ8p9bOZzVCluRx69CCekfAHPVYn/f95oft+uQKe3JIQl70+FY9PNbEKIIi6wgH4vZN9MchnB6hWlTT+a6EWwQ8nMQxM68vuNunCTdrNtUUrirQCWfoOH9IX4aOTo5Fpq0cfiWqQ7yjF2LB66tdRrsNkbxWdq3r640txWn9KzRJJZKiMr/WyQIg2xrQ16KMGOeOhzxsAH4eE4d6TEZXPGNG6M9NmFrHwbZ5BfJxsGth4YfJXmdWTuWeRgF/orIcJD56IaKeEltHpYsKINiJtKl9nUn3LfLJ0pA1uGxSe3etXxzPI3IsJfEjKmAVcikg==; s=purelymail3; d=spwhitton.name; v=1; bh=IWh1eTdNvjeqz3r1dzwlkX2R9sbv9XTQd3xSjLq3yng=; h=Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date; DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=AtYB2JsHjUHo8lV9XwjFDdBT4mvzLC3SU+e2hhrLJmMmjJFnnZY1cMEYmjQuzvIEwJa/rnunxt/AHz2PIlrC859Xsnxa4buwNDHlEJmx1VzorK712Neahzq2Oi7JMOhe1tclPgbeh7SDvQHe4lnFE+7qEsi1VFCBoVHX2bOszASZs16Yas25roNNmh+cWoJXsIdDRi6aNVdKcCHlE5l+fIReH/iviVsFk7Wmh3xrrUxZt5rWXyfvsmRu0KHnJIxAMw9H0/n/U097ZG7dF42lRrwO3wKxAdzLMp8qc3hzH35GUjY1Dl429WTs1D7CMiHJZUFRS6sdMODDJfXChl1n4Q==; s=purelymail3; d=purelymail.com; v=1; bh=IWh1eTdNvjeqz3r1dzwlkX2R9sbv9XTQd3xSjLq3yng=; h=Feedback-ID:Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date; Feedback-ID: 20115:3760:null:purelymail X-Pm-Original-To: 73853@debbugs.gnu.org Received: by smtp.purelymail.com (Purelymail SMTP) with ESMTPSA id -2000375680; (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384); Fri, 24 Jan 2025 12:05:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: by zephyr.silentflame.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 1ECA29416D0; Fri, 24 Jan 2025 12:05:14 +0000 (GMT) From: Sean Whitton To: Stefan Monnier Subject: Re: bug#73853: Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*? In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier via's message of "Sat, 18 Jan 2025 22:30:56 -0500") References: <87a5f2xir8.fsf@web.de> <87sess3g4m.fsf@web.de> <87jzathsqj.fsf_-_@web.de> <877c6rshph.fsf@web.de> Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2025 12:05:14 +0000 Message-ID: <87v7u4wh6t.fsf@zephyr.silentflame.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 73853 Cc: Michael Heerdegen , 73853@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Hello Stefan, On Sat 18 Jan 2025 at 10:30pm -05, Stefan Monnier wrote: > I don't have a strong preference either way. > I just know that they're redundant and would rather see one of the two disappear. > > If none of them can't be removed, I'd actually prefer them to be actual > aliases of each other, so at least ELisp non-specialists don't need to > learn the subtle differences between the two. I think you've been talking somewhat as though we were designing a new language. But what we're actually considering is changes to macros that exist, and that have been present instable releases that people rely on. We should have a bias towards retaining functionality that has been in releases of Emacs, just as much for macros as for, e.g., key bindings. Therefore, contrary to what you say, the fact that functionality exists in existing stable releases does thereby render that functionality more useful. If we removed one of them we would be removing the ability to express one's intention in accordance with the and/when convention about return values vs. side effects. So we shouldn't remove them. As for the question of making them aliases, I don't share your concerns about empty bodies being especially bad. So I think I would be more in support of making when-let* a synonym for and-let* than the other way around. But I'm not convinced that any change is required. -- Sean Whitton