From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Philipp Stephani Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#25154: 25.1; Bindings in cl-letf are in reverse order Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2016 12:17:54 +0000 Message-ID: References: <8737hwllow.fsf@gmail.com> <83zik4fdug.fsf@gnu.org> <8760msmdq1.fsf@gmail.com> <83r35fg9jq.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary=001a11444cc4cdacc805445260fc X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1482495565 3689 195.159.176.226 (23 Dec 2016 12:19:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2016 12:19:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 25154@debbugs.gnu.org, agrambot@gmail.com, tino.calancha@gmail.com To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Dec 23 13:19:20 2016 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 1cKOoa-0007p4-EM for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 13:19:12 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38792 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cKOod-0005J7-BX for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 07:19:15 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:59531) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cKOoT-0005If-8P for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 07:19:06 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cKOoQ-0001ym-24 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 07:19:05 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:36704) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cKOoP-0001yi-VX for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 07:19:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cKOoP-0003LL-NT for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 07:19:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Philipp Stephani Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Dec 2016 12:19:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 25154 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: notabug Original-Received: via spool by 25154-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B25154.148249549412792 (code B ref 25154); Fri, 23 Dec 2016 12:19:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 25154) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Dec 2016 12:18:14 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52103 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cKOnd-0003KF-Kd for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 07:18:13 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-wm0-f47.google.com ([74.125.82.47]:33409) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cKOnb-0003K1-J2 for 25154@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 07:18:12 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-wm0-f47.google.com with SMTP id m1so3431058wme.0 for <25154@debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 04:18:11 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=qKNVfp31im1pGar1E2htGPuwPSBfKDFJhdJAc3PQKM8=; b=HFOx/NKemAbdXJJyeGrUE+Y35KNXuWoTXaBMaEorC1wPW1a4xa7Q7Gx9l23bt1PGJ4 zn0lRbFU7xsyfdzpK4t87yoHLMdh7jaO/5kr3BmQsD1tvaoWvhKReZjjRXGk74VR71pn zhK66Zc/1Qef0+84K5gHVicKuf7M2gYFsBiX97sb7jxwprFrbJq+giGFkXXhy+lQ116b 13j0TqaeIbvDobL8RGBEroZ5bf6Fc2fZCRw4gZl8bwfzKq2n4pZGt28ZNEvxz40PjETB a3Yv5xu0Oyk+8AiBkZXlmoEBzj8cnFZ0UNgdmNZJs43pNFVnnNZ8r60H7I/4iHtP5YRu +WHA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=qKNVfp31im1pGar1E2htGPuwPSBfKDFJhdJAc3PQKM8=; b=nRepNXysCnv8AoQVPNGicOGe8XaJTeLbd/XlFeeowOw3Ln3iLcIakbJz4YdYyoTvoc EnGtihZq6h/WO7jnAoAY1x7upUj3GwkgIoB56le9/vbHbKviVcemRLix6HYdjX4FIifY RFRBdCM/wYZEQAziAovGYVWBZYeiyu4cOzH+WZAq5qKu6l8bLzeyZDK9bnCOL10JIIJ/ 5gcocHV5S2WmBAvRY+kwUZajcrsre72aMDjjPQyxUR9KHM+FwbJJeb+WNe+1TxQyctRd ZFF3BXuytH46s49ELyNCUWMYxhri4IuiIYFaUor/61gw8jPvJ7KIUw1/kk5k0ZCTd3el Rqcw== X-Gm-Message-State: AIkVDXIdfbrd81LvzTQK9fDrNc/1lDYLi3mUug5UUc+L2iEoOLc2QTwYMej/l3tgj9Ce7BUbGYTBrv0hQHT9IA== X-Received: by 10.28.87.84 with SMTP id l81mr16352320wmb.48.1482495485640; Fri, 23 Dec 2016 04:18:05 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <83r35fg9jq.fsf@gnu.org> 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:127360 Archived-At: --001a11444cc4cdacc805445260fc Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001a11444cc4cdacc205445260fa --001a11444cc4cdacc205445260fa Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Eli Zaretskii schrieb am Sa., 10. Dez. 2016 um 15:09 Uhr: > > From: Philipp Stephani > > Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2016 13:41:16 +0000 > > Cc: 25154@debbugs.gnu.org, Alex > > > > > Isn't it true that the order of evaluation in a 'let' is unspecified? > > > If you want a particular order, use 'let*'. > > Right, the order of evaluation in a let is up to the implementation. A > program > > should not rely on such details. > > The same statement should apply to cl-letf. > > > > I think that should be mentioned explicitly in the manuals: given that > the order of value evaluations is specified, > > people might expect the same for the bindings themselves. > > I agree, patches to that effect are welcome. (AFAICT, the manual > tries to say that already, but the wording could be more explicit.) > OK, I've attached a patch that hopefully clarifies this a bit. --001a11444cc4cdacc205445260fa Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable


Eli Za= retskii <eliz@gnu.org> schrieb am= Sa., 10. Dez. 2016 um 15:09=C2=A0Uhr:
> From: Philipp Stephani <p.stephani2@gmail.com>
> Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2016 13:41:16 +0000
> Cc: 25154@debbugs.gnu.org, Alex <agrambot@gmail.com>= ;
>
>=C2=A0 > Isn't it true that the order of evaluation in a 'le= t' is unspecified?
>=C2=A0 > If you want a particular order, use 'let*'.
>=C2=A0 Right, the order of evaluation in a let is up to the implementat= ion. A program
>=C2=A0 should not rely on such details.
>=C2=A0 The same statement should apply to cl-letf.
>
> I think that should be mentioned explicitly in the manuals: given that= the order of value evaluations is specified,
> people might expect the same for the bindings themselves.

I agree, patches to that effect are welcome.=C2=A0 (AFAICT, the manual
tries to say that already, but the wording could be more explicit.)

OK, I've attached a pa= tch that hopefully clarifies this a bit.=C2=A0
--001a11444cc4cdacc205445260fa-- --001a11444cc4cdacc805445260fc Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; name="0001-Document-that-variable-binding-order-is-unspecified.txt" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="0001-Document-that-variable-binding-order-is-unspecified.txt" Content-Transfer-Encoding: base64 Content-ID: <1592b9db413459154e1> X-Attachment-Id: 1592b9db413459154e1 RnJvbSA0MmQ3NDUwYzQxZDY5YTcxM2ViOGY5NDkyY2MxNjllOGMyYmMxNWNhIE1vbiBTZXAgMTcg MDA6MDA6MDAgMjAwMQpGcm9tOiBQaGlsaXBwIFN0ZXBoYW5pIDxwaHN0QGdvb2dsZS5jb20+CkRh dGU6IEZyaSwgMjMgRGVjIDIwMTYgMTM6MTQ6NTUgKzAxMDAKU3ViamVjdDogW1BBVENIXSBEb2N1 bWVudCB0aGF0IHZhcmlhYmxlIGJpbmRpbmcgb3JkZXIgaXMgdW5zcGVjaWZpZWQKCiogZG9jL2xp c3ByZWYvdmFyaWFibGVzLnRleGkgKExvY2FsIFZhcmlhYmxlcyk6CiogY2wudGV4aSAoTW9kaWZ5 IE1hY3Jvcyk6IERvY3VtZW50IHRoYXQgYXNzaWdubWVudCBvcmRlciBpbiAnbGV0JyBhbmQKJ2Ns LWxldGYnIGlzIHVuc3BlY2lmaWVkLgotLS0KIGRvYy9saXNwcmVmL3ZhcmlhYmxlcy50ZXhpIHwg MTIgKysrKysrKysrKysrCiBkb2MvbWlzYy9jbC50ZXhpICAgICAgICAgICB8ICA1ICsrKysrCiAy IGZpbGVzIGNoYW5nZWQsIDE3IGluc2VydGlvbnMoKykKCmRpZmYgLS1naXQgYS9kb2MvbGlzcHJl Zi92YXJpYWJsZXMudGV4aSBiL2RvYy9saXNwcmVmL3ZhcmlhYmxlcy50ZXhpCmluZGV4IGEyZDY0 ODE1ZDkuLmUyYzhjNTQyYWIgMTAwNjQ0Ci0tLSBhL2RvYy9saXNwcmVmL3ZhcmlhYmxlcy50ZXhp CisrKyBiL2RvYy9saXNwcmVmL3ZhcmlhYmxlcy50ZXhpCkBAIC0yMjEsNiArMjIxLDE4IEBAIExv Y2FsIFZhcmlhYmxlcwogICAgICBAcmVzdWx0e30gKDEgMikKIEBlbmQgZ3JvdXAKIEBlbmQgZXhh bXBsZQorCitPbiB0aGUgb3RoZXIgaGFuZCwgdGhlIG9yZGVyIG9mIEBlbXBoe2Fzc2lnbm1lbnRz fSBpcyB1bnNwZWNpZmllZDogaW4KK3RoZSBmb2xsb3dpbmcgZXhhbXBsZSwgZWl0aGVyIDEgb3Ig MiBtaWdodCBiZSBwcmludGVkLgorCitAZXhhbXBsZQorKGxldCAoKHggMSkKKyAgICAgICh4IDIp KQorICAocHJpbnQgeCkpCitAZW5kIGV4YW1wbGUKKworVGhlcmVmb3JlLCBhdm9pZCBiaW5kaW5n IGEgdmFyaWFibGUgbW9yZSB0aGFuIG9uY2UgaW4gYSBzaW5nbGUKK0Bjb2Rle2xldH0gZm9ybS4K IEBlbmQgZGVmc3BlYwogCiBAZGVmc3BlYyBsZXQqIChiaW5kaW5nc0Bkb3Rze30pIGZvcm1zQGRv dHN7fQpkaWZmIC0tZ2l0IGEvZG9jL21pc2MvY2wudGV4aSBiL2RvYy9taXNjL2NsLnRleGkKaW5k ZXggYzYyZmE3MjdjMS4uYWEwNDdlMjEyMiAxMDA2NDQKLS0tIGEvZG9jL21pc2MvY2wudGV4aQor KysgYi9kb2MvbWlzYy9jbC50ZXhpCkBAIC0xMTc5LDYgKzExNzksMTEgQEAgTW9kaWZ5IE1hY3Jv cwogYXMgQGNvZGV7c2V0Zn0gcGxhY2VzOyBlYWNoIHdpbGwgYWNjZXB0IGVpdGhlciBhbiBpbnRl Z2VyIG9yIGEKIG1hcmtlciBhcyB0aGUgc3RvcmVkIHZhbHVlLikKIAorTGlrZSBpbiB0aGUgY2Fz ZSBvZiBAY29kZXtsZXR9LCB0aGUgQHZhcnt2YWx1ZX0gZm9ybXMgYXJlIGV2YWx1YXRlZCBpbgor dGhlIG9yZGVyIHRoZXkgYXBwZWFyLCBidXQgdGhlIG9yZGVyIG9mIGFzc2lnbm1lbnRzIGlzIHVu c3BlY2lmaWVkLgorVGhlcmVmb3JlLCBhdm9pZCBhc3NpZ25pbmcgdG8gdGhlIHNhbWUgQHZhcntw bGFjZX0gbW9yZSB0aGFuIG9uY2UgaW4gYQorc2luZ2xlIEBjb2Rle2NsLWxldGZ9IGZvcm0uCisK IFNpbmNlIGdlbmVyYWxpemVkIHZhcmlhYmxlcyBsb29rIGxpa2UgbGlzdHMsIEBjb2Rle2xldH0n cyBzaG9ydGhhbmQKIG9mIHVzaW5nIEBzYW1we2Zvb30gZm9yIEBzYW1weyhmb28gbmlsKX0gYXMg YSBAdmFye2JpbmRpbmd9IHdvdWxkCiBiZSBhbWJpZ3VvdXMgaW4gQGNvZGV7Y2wtbGV0Zn0gYW5k IGlzIG5vdCBhbGxvd2VkLgotLSAKMi4xMS4wCgo= --001a11444cc4cdacc805445260fc--