From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Basil L. Contovounesios" via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#56110: 27+; switching from line-mode to char-mode Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2022 00:14:02 +0300 Message-ID: <87czf0qu3p.fsf@tcd.ie> References: <875ykvs9gq.fsf@electra.home.arpa> <87wndaw84w.fsf@web.de> <87sfnyw6m7.fsf@web.de> <877d58obnn.fsf@web.de> Reply-To: "Basil L. Contovounesios" Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="27176"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Michael Heerdegen , 56110@debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Monnier To: signal3 Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Jun 22 23:15:21 2022 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 1o47h3-0006qB-4g for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 22 Jun 2022 23:15:21 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34856 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o47h1-0002Yk-FB for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 22 Jun 2022 17:15:19 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:54032) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o47gk-0002Yb-Nk for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Jun 2022 17:15:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:42846) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o47gk-0008Oo-Ed for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Jun 2022 17:15:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1o47gk-0000lP-An for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Jun 2022 17:15:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: "Basil L. Contovounesios" Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2022 21:15:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 56110 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 56110-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B56110.16559324552861 (code B ref 56110); Wed, 22 Jun 2022 21:15:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 56110) by debbugs.gnu.org; 22 Jun 2022 21:14:15 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36741 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1o47fz-0000k5-9p for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 22 Jun 2022 17:14:15 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-ed1-f51.google.com ([209.85.208.51]:35596) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1o47fu-0000jp-Lb for 56110@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 22 Jun 2022 17:14:14 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-ed1-f51.google.com with SMTP id e40so13129798eda.2 for <56110@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 22 Jun 2022 14:14:10 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tcd.ie; s=google21; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=CnoxR+B06DCCoOMiTAMuqzExt4wCTzW5atLpcwR0iQU=; b=TB+wbdQyHvuzCfSAofqMpSFWiiOGCi+YxG+SeUv/gfAjWYb8yoG/70IWlr5ZNDDlC2 flxqQ0AKq6+fvM4W6oyXBFYw3V3f3A4uDmoiPpjkr1n/xIlpccqelG8VOCMWpWxOmbMS znwymx36A+ESAd2VgUBFpmKqojsbJhiWR0dL5Bz1etDuZN8+Ydt42R5P+4EiJT8lykzI 7owwxJnIYK+JGxqYpnMZ55UfojuCSFQmF+/RPrLjqyx/+1AZuLy+EU6HR+qdIJ3KnVAf YPbepIY7vlIZiQnaFtCKPVeTBPWiPQ0zu9UGbOjoF6DFsYPApPqpWCHFwSDIqB0E6/Mj reJw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=CnoxR+B06DCCoOMiTAMuqzExt4wCTzW5atLpcwR0iQU=; b=TGXhm0GhW/JN6AOLHW+ahcBBtytRCRPAql/YqyyAtj3sPeSPNCqetBB0tJXxdRYqE3 ASaInW33Xb3AQBqsVfCsNlCgvcW6eFudxIqrZdrc2VF49SfESTIj+cQReWR2FXq2kfQK D+q+1SeRnNRVVPcHNRaIudzFOmpkl1Qw/Vf2lZJps7Kt9L/G6aow7OzmX8nZVL6Cuhby M0wcQne1VwIq4sciKCxL3i1vq3xUNrIo9bLsaZbaMmWkFKZhN5jiSLpXU8Mw7jUwBbti BIABR2YGKYtM4z/QwviQdknClV6LXEXui1hMxgZ6Au1NQVLRq5mJx94QHZTDsWatLcg7 vl1g== X-Gm-Message-State: AJIora/6yjlTYC/rJVGRRSUZaebEWUNfrVQP5uKhChDf3z414sHAhV+C leK9yJf/V8YwoCwZioucOBEPxA== X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGRyM1vghX5KYbnvObCrdN9Qe31MRhta078crhL5wCrzUiKYobJ/x8r31fem1TbNFYn5m8yYBcv0dA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:3808:b0:435:5a6c:9dd9 with SMTP id es8-20020a056402380800b004355a6c9dd9mr6661101edb.368.1655932444786; Wed, 22 Jun 2022 14:14:04 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from localhost ([2a02:587:322b:6f5e:dc92:136a:a7c4:dc8c]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id oq14-20020a170906cc8e00b00722e559ee66sm3122616ejb.62.2022.06.22.14.14.03 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Wed, 22 Jun 2022 14:14:04 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: (signal3's message of "Wed, 22 Jun 2022 19:22:28 +0000") 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:235053 Archived-At: signal3 [2022-06-22 19:22 +0000] wrote: > On Wed, Jun 22, 2022 at 5:23 PM Michael Heerdegen > wrote: >> >> That works - but I fail to understand why a simple `let' doesn't suffice >> (which works as well): >> >> Does anybody know? FWIW, I also fail to see why let wouldn't be equivalent for most intensive porpoises, but then I wouldn't trust myself to tell a porpoise from a dolphin. > I don't know. But, whenever I'm making changes I like to keep the > smallest hamming distance possible between revisions. Just a pet peeve > maybe? > > So unless there is a reason to avoid using 'let', it seems preferable > to me. That way the snippet better resembles the version prior to 27+. Surely rewriting in terms of let increases Hamming distance? ;) In any case, my vote is for correct and simpler code over a smaller diff. > And in that vein, I'm not sure why the unwind-protect was removed. AFAICT it's redundant because let always unwinds its temporary bindings, in contrast with the previous add-function and setq which make permanent modifications that require manual unwinding. Thanks, -- Basil