From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Michael Heerdegen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#28254: 26.0.50; SRFI-2 and-let* Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 14:39:59 +0200 Message-ID: <87efrcccps.fsf@drachen> References: <87a82kdb4e.fsf@holos> <87inh36sap.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <20170902021043.GA7509@holos.localdomain> <878thx7qcc.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <20170902041424.GA21189@holos.localdomain> <87tw0lzn7w.fsf@drachen> <20170902133604.GA27251@holos.localdomain> <20170904011356.GA21128@holos.localdomain> <20170905035548.GB11331@holos.localdomain> <20170909003355.GA3363@holos.localdomain> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1505220239 6775 195.159.176.226 (12 Sep 2017 12:43:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 12:43:59 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: 28254@debbugs.gnu.org, Noam Postavsky To: Mark Oteiza Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Sep 12 14:43:55 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1drkXM-0000V8-KI for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 12 Sep 2017 14:43:32 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35598 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1drkXT-0005zo-MA for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 12 Sep 2017 08:43:39 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49849) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1drkV2-0003WG-5J for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Sep 2017 08:41:12 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1drkUw-0004o3-CV for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Sep 2017 08:41:08 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:54445) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1drkUw-0004nw-8X for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Sep 2017 08:41:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1drkUv-0007Q7-TU for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 12 Sep 2017 08:41:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Michael Heerdegen Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Sep 2017 12:41:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 28254 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 28254-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B28254.150522002028457 (code B ref 28254); Tue, 12 Sep 2017 12:41:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 28254) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Sep 2017 12:40:20 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34893 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1drkUG-0007Ou-57 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 12 Sep 2017 08:40:20 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.15.3]:57164) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1drkUD-0007Oc-Ir for 28254@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 12 Sep 2017 08:40:18 -0400 Original-Received: from drachen.dragon ([194.166.167.125]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb002 [213.165.67.108]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0Md4ZG-1e8jP02iyQ-00ICa0; Tue, 12 Sep 2017 14:40:00 +0200 In-Reply-To: <20170909003355.GA3363@holos.localdomain> (Mark Oteiza's message of "Fri, 8 Sep 2017 20:33:55 -0400") X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:jxF2mJ9rz9TzXPI48QWjJd25PTIy+WHD5p9FIDpcckD9A/NKhQL rTRr88XXfDMh7hFvjJY950lywc2mgmLc30x69UBeGvgEZ/fVNoB9LggtqoD2qzsz87fFx8N evT4Uk+SsdEYefr3m+slfVuzzxUEfvitqkU5vYFWXLeA7uHIxoRBJX8eetzrQLITGS1YQhI xMxBPe+quQ+oi000AY9UA== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:Q2OmgA+NxMI=:HOI1FePBgTemWRX6hm50c2 AHfNR7rZgTk7p01QJ7UHRm6q6XQpbNrSBlAV/YqoYSnu9irc9uJ4DByCtH3/ppEVfYxkZRi3U efErH3fV9vlQE0Dku4z3lCid3yngWUQbJYIyg8svK1/jKSwNYprxVMmP31zhqachObe6feABw fE29QOV66QMqpZhLBYbUkY7GYkanusQA82Cy2iXBs6VgR2yW3aP3SkSk6P7k8knkfLZaLAKqG vvUYgsu7sYaFEKOCsVsWgRzqyLn5O/zzXFQt1Pl/hjuhLciBHyrviP2ZTsfkdKdfu1bZzivmH ihZ7zrUsv68CKxTmEuXD1RmB+V340osv43JgtFxKsOYJYiKhuYl3fPKR1DYZttQ4unkiN59yn dL+Qtc4ESs4QuUCEG0mmujpzRCWFLJMUuid/D4mFC9cr0DThnANMANZjrU+hFT38SpJwehNVr te2iZpIMATdPZGQ41nA2Y4wPeOK3vUh44YG26pjNsje/4cAjdx+eyL3YcCvaB7jjy66VTi8H3 +mnS+DCWlK7sKp6Xhng3tHMuM7/2dfBXeXoBHq/Vs3aGTEC//3MgnvjqXE0sMyEEkz8Edtyd+ fMJCinE9rijrMSDSDqPOckVtbr3jOB2IpFX9nVyzA2lZhFpNUhLfIDaJ8MS29yzgoi/ffq7DR uH0ij0iQ8eL7HmiBtiidHR695ipEz06bQO90OE5apV+0msaXdSmsNtMKoKcZRtszqlIP0OjUZ k0+R3WHOkp0ijn9VzWL7kmI3Sq7Dz9BOKUTE8teA3mPyyOHI5WVQqdKnrKxAI1TILVHGA/yV X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:136828 Archived-At: Mark Oteiza writes: > Any comments? Some notes on the documentation of `if-let*' after your patch: | "Bind variables according to VARLIST and eval THEN or ELSE. | Each binding is evaluated in turn with `let*', Maybe comparing with `let*' is confusing after the change, because not all bindings must look like (SYMBOL EXPRESSION) any more. I think when we just remove the two words "with `let*'", the documentation is still fine. | and evaluation stops if a binding value is nil. If all are non-nil, | the value of THEN is returned, or the last form in ELSE is returned. Not really related to your change, but: Maybe we should additionally say that THEN can refer to the bindings made in the VARLIST, but ELSE to none, not even to those that resulted in non-nil values before "failing". | Each element of VARLIST is a symbol (which is bound to nil) [...] Did we agree that we drop this useless case? Thanks, Michael.