From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#45610: 27.1; =?UTF-8?Q?Symbol=E2=80=99s?= function definition is void: seq-concatenate Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2021 17:07:08 +0200 Message-ID: <83y2h8bv1f.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83v9cfecab.fsf@gnu.org> <83r1n3e7ps.fsf@gnu.org> <83eej3e1xi.fsf@gnu.org> <874kjz8fgj.fsf@gnus.org> <83eej2c9bf.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="1441"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: larsi@gnus.org, 45610@debbugs.gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca To: Leo Liu Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Jan 04 16:08:48 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 1kwRTT-0000HG-Ms for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 04 Jan 2021 16:08:47 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57906 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kwRTS-0001pW-OM for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 04 Jan 2021 10:08:46 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:52956) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kwRSk-0001PK-J7 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Jan 2021 10:08:02 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:48406) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kwRSk-0004Ke-B7 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Jan 2021 10:08:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kwRSj-0000Uq-V8 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Jan 2021 10:08:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2021 15:08:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 45610 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 45610-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B45610.16097728531861 (code B ref 45610); Mon, 04 Jan 2021 15:08:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 45610) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Jan 2021 15:07:33 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59952 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kwRSG-0000Tx-My for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 04 Jan 2021 10:07:32 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:59718) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kwRSE-0000Th-9m for 45610@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 04 Jan 2021 10:07:30 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:36116) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kwRS8-0004B8-RK; Mon, 04 Jan 2021 10:07:24 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:2735 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1kwRS3-0005Oi-83; Mon, 04 Jan 2021 10:07:22 -0500 In-Reply-To: (message from Leo Liu on Mon, 04 Jan 2021 13:39:03 +0800) 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:197309 Archived-At: > From: Leo Liu > Cc: Lars Ingebrigtsen , 45610@debbugs.gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca > Date: Mon, 04 Jan 2021 13:39:03 +0800 > > On 2021-01-03 17:46 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > In your opinion, is this better than my suggestion? > > I didn't comment much on this point last night. > > Adding (require 'seq) to cl-concatenate is probably the least favourable > because it also defeats the purpose of the `inline' cl-proclaim. > > Adding autoload cookie for seq-concatenate is simple though not the > cleanest, IOW, we have the workings of cl-concatenate in some situations > depend on the autoload cookie. But this is not uncommon practice. > > Given the dilemma we are in I wonder if the considerations for `inline' > cl-concatenate in the first place are no longer applicable. Thanks. Stefan, any comments? My personal tendency is to add the autoload cookie, with a comment saying that cl-concatenate needs that. At least on the emacs-27 branch. Any problems or issues with that? What do people think about removing cl-concatenate from the inline declaration (on master)?