From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Gregory Heytings Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#52063: 28.0.60; Confusing presentation of lambda Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2021 22:37:53 +0000 Message-ID: <664b6d0147ece2617779@heytings.org> References: <83czmqaegb.fsf@gnu.org> <874k82vwe5.fsf@gnus.org> <831r35afde.fsf@gnu.org> <87v90hu36b.fsf@gnus.org> <83v90h8zjw.fsf@gnu.org> <87r1b5u1cl.fsf@gnus.org> <83pmqp8vps.fsf@gnu.org> <83zgpt7353.fsf@gnu.org> <83tug172a9.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="6670"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: fgunbin@fastmail.fm, larsi@gnus.org, 52063@debbugs.gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 24 23:38:10 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1mq0u2-0001XD-NH for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 24 Nov 2021 23:38:10 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47464 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mq0u0-00050Q-P8 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 24 Nov 2021 17:38:08 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:53224) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mq0tu-000503-2N for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Nov 2021 17:38:02 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:43606) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mq0tt-0007Ft-QC for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Nov 2021 17:38:01 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mq0tt-0007kd-N7 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Nov 2021 17:38:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Gregory Heytings Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 24 Nov 2021 22:38:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 52063 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 52063-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B52063.163779347729785 (code B ref 52063); Wed, 24 Nov 2021 22:38:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 52063) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Nov 2021 22:37:57 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55152 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mq0tp-0007kL-6Z for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 24 Nov 2021 17:37:57 -0500 Original-Received: from heytings.org ([95.142.160.155]:47904) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1mq0tn-0007kB-1t for 52063@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 24 Nov 2021 17:37:55 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=heytings.org; s=20210101; t=1637793473; bh=kRA0wtDdryoa9UNJ9KcLVvWHWwOMQ1jfGeKrZzE1H58=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References:From; b=duG7Tf1pRi4TBUGHf07hHkHYw3hSDRKl2E8mXd50RXC40UBSDMtfzWxCbYuFlOnmJ gHh0h8mBcK0zfP3udxgyvmaOh/ODjjmvP9AW0VFzxVEDMkU+bP7ld0SJl1s4DgNP7k GCpjgLGWZRIll+/HzheSz4aTjZVFgzwvuyY2WHXRjQ4USuoHMhrKLSaotvdkUl6+h2 S5U9UA9WFjmA8Hd0/+Dd4yaS3Aw6H17etsC8j+/CpOiSKxqV7jAvBbYTKSUa4RmrCx DmMvC6JpycUXhNO1+sPuOe6xorpczxkAbOxthcUtiofXIWmcLQO7p5uY1CpwcxdYt8 fJ8STqxNux80A== In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:220783 Archived-At: >> I'm annoyed by this misfeature. If it means nothing to you and others, >> so be it. > > I fully understand desire to see function values printed as much as > possible as their original source code, but it's hard to reconcile this > with the needs of clean semantics, efficient execution, good code > analysis, ... > AFAIU, the fundamental question here is: is "(closure (t) args body)" different in any way from "(lambda args body)"? If not, is there a good reason to use a "(closure (t)" instead of a "(lambda"? FWIW, I'm running an Emacs with the following patch right now, which apparently breaks a couple of edebug tests in make check. Apart from that, it seems that it doesn't change anything in the way Emacs behaves. diff --git a/src/eval.c b/src/eval.c index 94ad060773..5d02cabaf4 100644 --- a/src/eval.c +++ b/src/eval.c @@ -564,6 +564,8 @@ DEFUN ("function", Ffunction, Sfunction, 1, UNEVALLED, 0, xsignal2 (Qwrong_number_of_arguments, Qfunction, Flength (args)); if (!NILP (Vinternal_interpreter_environment) + && !(EQ (Fcar (Vinternal_interpreter_environment), Qt) && + NILP (Fcdr (Vinternal_interpreter_environment))) && CONSP (quoted) && EQ (XCAR (quoted), Qlambda)) { /* This is a lambda expression within a lexical environment;