From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Noam Postavsky Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#19362: 25.0.50; Fix `pp.el' in line with new `elisp-mode.el' Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2016 19:36:55 -0400 Message-ID: References: <7cb215b9-a70d-472a-ba85-15a9bc613a5e@default> <87h9ejkqqs.fsf@gnus.org> <3fe660b7-2b95-4e4a-a2c6-f03c751135d8@default> <87eg9nf0vu.fsf@gnus.org> <7a1d1091-78cc-4e88-b2d4-95d36e641ee5@default> <87poqyi05f.fsf@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1467848306 8849 80.91.229.3 (6 Jul 2016 23:38:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2016 23:38:26 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Lars Ingebrigtsen , 19362@debbugs.gnu.org To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jul 07 01:38:17 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1bKwOV-0000TB-Rn for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 07 Jul 2016 01:38:16 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36361 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bKwOR-00024I-Vo for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 06 Jul 2016 19:38:12 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42760) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bKwOM-000248-87 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Jul 2016 19:38:07 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bKwOI-000881-1p for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Jul 2016 19:38:05 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:55888) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bKwOH-00087x-UH for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Jul 2016 19:38:01 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bKwOH-0001zx-Pv for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Jul 2016 19:38:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Noam Postavsky Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2016 23:38:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 19362 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: moreinfo Original-Received: via spool by 19362-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B19362.14678482237603 (code B ref 19362); Wed, 06 Jul 2016 23:38:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 19362) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Jul 2016 23:37:03 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39992 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bKwNL-0001yZ-Lq for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 06 Jul 2016 19:37:03 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-oi0-f42.google.com ([209.85.218.42]:33058) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1bKwNJ-0001y4-9R for 19362@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 06 Jul 2016 19:37:03 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-oi0-f42.google.com with SMTP id u201so2524186oie.0 for <19362@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 06 Jul 2016 16:37:01 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc; bh=eVhBL2ybiaWCz/5OX9XrdfUQtH5YETQFHBovtaVLkdI=; b=uRJ6HBPqZf3NonmECN61AaAq7uHHRXk5e+hZfdO/0b6Qjk4buc3sVLX5dwGtZETu3i 7mL28qJy5A6niLJJto5oGqkDcbAp9Vs25jlLBv7wOeBeuOj6DJkry3rLlSxN+AcsgmJC 5El9Ie0weS/n0+RNK3NdWoqUkrFxguPBeDEhp4wOxJxF5pXNJWszw/LzIhMjbKW1dJii wSafBij/kfjJwp/I9Q0s72WXv3di/2qdc9J1kIO+O06lVKZSgdorBvbW39VIly1WlpCP IKXNnU0uE2AVXmilIyUTLBs924lL35DvXgqdDcHpp25EW7dfd9Yo7NlF5Tl4GZ/L1qey sJUw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=eVhBL2ybiaWCz/5OX9XrdfUQtH5YETQFHBovtaVLkdI=; b=QdqtkVEa2evtRcULIHSxr2YdnRVLtAlwNn4XPpfbcX0mZC/dGREHmuuMs5R48ZK50a mFX6QUV0XEd4h1He9cdmi9FLrqu3y3nFW1D5Qbke5AxRp0Uu1pCS/XaISZ/up2imlW3S i1SXBAraCVC0C/6mU2MqWHNeaRDUkmk9oW0KIjCyoKmdbDBoem0hZ5WbCH8yONWa7yle tUAQRAUfXHnDKPTffjTa9WKQzuOtfFMkGKDZ8WdGOwLkVIeIkKln4Wh/SZ/eOaifTUT9 jAnfTM9phhhl8d/hR35mt2/T5t8QJqSzxH0i8YJqXzhScMAV8zG2k28HcmjTjMqP+86Y GfFg== X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tL3JibDvS37GEH384kaON41KLTEvuZzLmdKECaR7LFC3T9xyxyj1WgU4qnKz5KChxAiWSVAtmD3M+SP+w== X-Received: by 10.202.207.16 with SMTP id f16mr13522733oig.178.1467848215777; Wed, 06 Jul 2016 16:36:55 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.157.4.197 with HTTP; Wed, 6 Jul 2016 16:36:55 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-Google-Sender-Auth: vmnwG9jhwgInRPMUVYMD3FwyjgA 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:120540 Archived-At: On Wed, Jul 6, 2016 at 6:35 PM, Drew Adams wrote: >> But do you know of any concrete cases where there is a difference in >> behaviour? Or is this report just about code duplication (or lack >> thereof)? > > 1. I don't know about concrete cases; sorry. > > 2. This report is an enhancement request; it doesn't report a bug. > > In the past, `eval-last-sexp' and `pp-eval-last-sexp' did about the > same thing, apart from the pretty-printing part (which the latter > farms out to another function). So you're not talking about the difference between pp-to-string vs elisp--eval-last-sexp-print-value. > My guess is that _improvements_ > were made to the former case (only). Just what those improvements > were and why they were made I don't know. [...] > In any case, I was not really referring to the interactive behavior > but to the code/behavior after the sexp has been determined. In > the case of `eval-last-sexp' I guess that means the code other > than `elisp--preceding-sexp'. And you're not talking about the difference between (pp-last-sexp) vs (eval-sexp-add-defvars (elisp--preceding-sexp)). What's left? They both call eval in the middle. eval-last-sexp honours eval-expression-debug-on-error while pp-eval-last-sexp does not (this was the case for the old lisp-mode.el code in 24.3 as well). Other than that I don't see anything of significance.