GNU bug report logs - #9482
Documentation bug: Emacs Lisp Manual should say quoting does not cons explicitly in quoting section. related to bug#9469

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
Cc: tracker <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#9482: closed (Documentation bug: Emacs Lisp Manual should say
 quoting does not cons explicitly in quoting section. related to bug#9469)
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 14:20:03 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Your message dated Fri, 16 Sep 2011 10:14:39 -0400
with message-id <jwvhb4ctw3k.fsf-monnier+emacs <at> gnu.org>
and subject line Re: specific manual text suggestion
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #9482,
regarding Documentation bug: Emacs Lisp Manual should say quoting does not cons explicitly in quoting section. related to bug#9469
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs <at> gnu.org.)


-- 
9482: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=9482
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems

[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Le Wang <l26wang <at> gmail.com>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: Documentation bug: Emacs Lisp Manual should say quoting does not cons
	explicitly in quoting section. related to bug#9469
Date: Mon, 12 Sep 2011 23:01:23 +0800

Relevant page here:
http://www.gnu.org/s/emacs/manual/html_node/elisp/Quoting.html

I was confused and always assumed that

'(a . b)

is simply short hand for

(cons 'a 'b)

Reading stackexchange, it seems at least some other people are under
this impression as well.  This works a majority of the time, but when
it fails it's really surprising.

In fact, the manual already has an example of this pit-fall in the
nconc section: http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/elisp/html_node/Rearrangement.html

I think the quoting section should give an explicit warning with a
reference to the nconc example.



-- 
Le

[Message part 3 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
To: Le Wang <l26wang <at> gmail.com>
Cc: 9482-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: specific manual text suggestion
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2011 10:14:39 -0400

> My terminology may be not quite right, but if I read something like
> this, the difference would be much clearer.

Thanks for your sample text.  I tweaked it a bit to make it hopefully
even more explicit, see patch below.


        Stefan


--- src/eval.c	2011-09-09 01:06:52 +0000
+++ src/eval.c	2011-09-16 14:09:39 +0000
@@ -475,6 +475,14 @@
 
 DEFUN ("quote", Fquote, Squote, 1, UNEVALLED, 0,
        doc: /* Return the argument, without evaluating it.  `(quote x)' yields `x'.
+Warning: `quote' does not construct its return value, but just returns
+the value that was pre-constructed by the Lisp reader (see info node
+`(elisp)Printed Representation').
+This means that '(a . b) is not identical to (cons 'a 'b): the former
+does not cons.  Quoting should be reserved for constants that will
+never be modified by side-effects, unless you like self-modifying
+code.  See the common pitfall in info node `(elisp)Rearrangement' for
+an example of unexpected results when a quoted object is modified.
 usage: (quote ARG)  */)
   (Lisp_Object args)
 {

Previous Next

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