bug#13740: About a coding convention

bug#13740: About a coding convention

[Xue Fuqiao]

In (info "(elisp) Coding Conventions"):

   * Constructs that define a function or variable should be macros,
     not functions, and their names should start with `define-'.  The
     macro should receive the name to be defined as the first argument.
     That will help various tools find the definition automatically.
     Avoid constructing the names in the macro itself, since that would
     confuse these tools.

I think macros like `cl-defsubst', `cl-defun' should be mentioned here.

-- 
Best regards, Xue Fuqiao.
http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/XueFuqiao

bug#13740: About a coding convention

[Glenn Morris]

Xue Fuqiao wrote:

> In (info "(elisp) Coding Conventions"):
>
>    * Constructs that define a function or variable should be macros,
>      not functions, and their names should start with `define-'.  The
>      macro should receive the name to be defined as the first argument.
>      That will help various tools find the definition automatically.
>      Avoid constructing the names in the macro itself, since that would
>      confuse these tools.
>
> I think macros like `cl-defsubst', `cl-defun' should be mentioned here.

Why? What would you say about them?

bug#13740: About a coding convention

[Xue Fuqiao]

On Tue, 19 Feb 2013 14:55:35 -0500
Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org> wrote:

> Xue Fuqiao wrote:
> > In (info "(elisp) Coding Conventions"):
> >
> >    * Constructs that define a function or variable should be macros,
> >      not functions, and their names should start with `define-'.  The
> >      macro should receive the name to be defined as the first argument.
> >      That will help various tools find the definition automatically.
> >      Avoid constructing the names in the macro itself, since that would
> >      confuse these tools.
> >
> > I think macros like `cl-defsubst', `cl-defun' should be mentioned here.

> Why?

They are macros that define functions, but they don't start with `define-'.

>  What would you say about them?

Maybe something like this:

Constructs that define a function or variable should be macros, not functions, and their names should start with `define-', except for some macros in `cl-lib', like `cl-defsubst' and `cl-defun'.

-- 
Best regards, Xue Fuqiao.
http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/XueFuqiao

bug#13740: About a coding convention

[Xue Fuqiao]

On Thu, 21 Feb 2013 01:54:56 +0000 (GMT)
Christopher Schmidt <christopher@ch.ristopher.com> wrote:

> Xue Fuqiao <xfq.free@gmail.com> writes:
> > They are macros that define functions, but they don't start with
> > `define-'.
> Anything about cl-lib does not belong into the Elisp node.  IMO cl-lib
> breaking conventions is not worth a note, either.

But cl-lib is a part of Emacs.  We make aliases like this:

define-inline-function-cl --> cl-defsubst
defune-function-cl --> cl-defun

Or we can mention the convention breakage in the CL manual.

>         Christopher

-- 
Best regards, Xue Fuqiao.
http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/XueFuqiao

bug#13740: About a coding convention

[Stefan Monnier]

> Constructs that define a function or variable should be macros, not
> functions, and their names should start with `define-', except for some
> macros in `cl-lib', like `cl-defsubst' and `cl-defun'.

Actually, I think they can also start with "<prefix>-define-".


        Stefan

bug#13740: About a coding convention

[Glenn Morris]

Xue Fuqiao wrote:

> Constructs that define a function or variable should be macros, not
> functions, and their names should start with `define-', except for
> some macros in `cl-lib', like `cl-defsubst' and `cl-defun'.

I don't think it is useful to list pre-existing exceptions to a general
guideline.


The whole thing is mutually inconsistent anyway:

   constructs that define functions, variables, etc., work better if
   they start with @samp{defun} or @samp{defvar}, [...]
   [...]
   Constructs that define a function or variable should be macros,
   not functions, and their names should start with @samp{define-}.

bug#13740: About a coding convention

[Stefan Kangas]

Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org> writes:

> Xue Fuqiao wrote:
>
>> Constructs that define a function or variable should be macros, not
>> functions, and their names should start with `define-', except for
>> some macros in `cl-lib', like `cl-defsubst' and `cl-defun'.
>
> I don't think it is useful to list pre-existing exceptions to a general
> guideline.

Agreed.  Since no one else has voiced an opinion, I'm therefore closing
this bug report.

Best regards,
Stefan Kangas