GNU bug report logs - #78593
31.0.50; describe-key broken on interactive lambdas

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Pip Cet <pipcet <at> protonmail.com>
To: 78593 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, eliz <at> gnu.org, monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca, enometh <at> meer.net, stefankangas <at> gmail.com
Subject: bug#78593: 31.0.50; describe-key broken on interactive lambdas
Date: Sat, 28 Jun 2025 22:27:46 +0000

"Stefan Monnier via \"Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors\"" <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org> writes:

>>> > Stefan, this is due to your change:
>>> >
>>> >   commit a4ec9ca12969018cdf15b8cc713b3ba054326f99
>>> >   Author:     Stefan Kangas <stefankangas <at> gmail.com>
>>> >   AuthorDate: Tue Apr 1 21:25:33 2025 +0200
>>> >   Commit:     Stefan Kangas <stefankangas <at> gmail.com>
>>> >   CommitDate: Tue Apr 1 21:25:33 2025 +0200
>>> >
>>> >       function-put: signal error with non-symbol
>>> >
>>> >       * lisp/subr.el (function-get): Signal an error if given a non-symbol
>>> >       for consistency with 'get'.
>>> >       * test/lisp/subr-tests.el (subr-butlast): Test for the above.
>>> >
>>> > Any reasons not to revert that?  function-get correctly returns nil if
>>> > its argument is not a symbol, so why should this signal an error?
>>>
>>> IMO, `function-get/put` should accept *functions* as arguments, not
>>> just symbols.

I'm a bit confused about function-put: are you saying that all functions
should have a plist (in a weak hash table?) that function-put
manipulates, or that we should silently ignore attempts to set a
function property on a non-symbol?

Pip

Previous Next

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