GNU bug report logs -
#73853
Should and-let* become a synonym for when-let*?
Previous Next
Full log
Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):
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
This bug report was last modified 141 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.