From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Tino Calancha Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#25154: 25.1; Bindings in cl-letf are in reverse order Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2016 23:01:55 +0900 (JST) Message-ID: References: <8737hwllow.fsf@gmail.com> <83zik4fdug.fsf@gnu.org> <8760msmdq1.fsf@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/mixed; BOUNDARY="8323329-378543943-1481378521=:22291" X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1481378596 1123 195.159.176.226 (10 Dec 2016 14:03:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2016 14:03:16 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) Cc: 25154@debbugs.gnu.org, Alex , Tino Calancha To: Philipp Stephani Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Dec 10 15:03:11 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 1cFiF3-0007RM-7n for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 10 Dec 2016 15:03:09 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51885 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cFiF7-0001gy-8u for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 10 Dec 2016 09:03:13 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47066) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cFiF1-0001gi-AS for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Dec 2016 09:03:08 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cFiEw-0001Hi-FI for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Dec 2016 09:03:07 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:49470) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cFiEw-0001Hc-Bn for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Dec 2016 09:03:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cFiEw-0005XC-3l for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Dec 2016 09:03:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Tino Calancha Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 10 Dec 2016 14:03:02 +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=B25154.148137852921202 (code B ref 25154); Sat, 10 Dec 2016 14:03:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 25154) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Dec 2016 14:02:09 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36635 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cFiE5-0005Vu-BA for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 10 Dec 2016 09:02:09 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-pg0-f68.google.com ([74.125.83.68]:35102) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cFiE4-0005VV-6n for 25154@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 10 Dec 2016 09:02:08 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-pg0-f68.google.com with SMTP id p66so5410358pga.2 for <25154@debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 10 Dec 2016 06:02:08 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:date:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id:references :user-agent:mime-version; bh=wlQC8kFQnW8NciuTeXmQnaZa3l/yXNfybUX5dSWYfg0=; b=lA5bi/YI5oNBx0aG5daRZvjN/rEoDk2N9ohJVI9uaMpmrFuMNPTStar5JwtS+438lO uQh634j1sMt20v3dGwkuyJy5wkoyv5usFy1METlIzaHeOQ/B8QwCzR3+1QRdY9Pk0KUI r44URpzBQLtdMZ8sLu3PNQJPRCBujWidpfuMe4VA4MsBQnxZISEyJpKEkAqaqUn3Ih/L FXALOkp5LGoORTcLIdRo/VLLG5th7agQS/dhkM0Sk7bepC8YDPzOlF2sZWZLnmjB+fKP fOmgk7WQ3a+QT0hmwW7J+MzDxtGbrjKY8Y11+dgjLyViTD9lFlJ1sLcTyoBaCHMY7YL2 GpPg== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20130820; h=x-gm-message-state:from:date:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:message-id :references:user-agent:mime-version; bh=wlQC8kFQnW8NciuTeXmQnaZa3l/yXNfybUX5dSWYfg0=; b=W3FF1U0SkRWHRTVJnc/vbOto/+y3zH8OdrKwSLUXz+s7+24MB7ohT3gaazlZnACaR8 h1xdxtMUyEP3jGxeRybrMLPBXiWQ4P5jO19wGbC3Q6W9hsko7n+28oACkiP8o2tOyuBA xn6kZAFDKMhp/3Ovfvhm+uZNsfds+xdgoBZ/OqmT8KJn6mhH9R9b5DJyKp+0QqU/XQ4P o4VuytgnCCTKGezTpdB9Mf8JQ3Jty8vSooiBoWV+u9az842AsEIvOMbc5GTiPX5JcaAP K/O1HOW4WLL3765Cp7X2BrIOz/EhkoPQI10ZSi8+6gm3Z4Ow0FTbqpn2RbdRLRfyofI+ IYGQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AKaTC03IRtTQQiulcFa6bVgk4MCAIbT3zLALXUpSUVhe3hJuVt7XWziEE9d2ng5hVAQwXw== X-Received: by 10.99.146.76 with SMTP id s12mr151972170pgn.8.1481378522568; Sat, 10 Dec 2016 06:02:02 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from calancha-pc (177.192.218.133.dy.bbexcite.jp. [133.218.192.177]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id y200sm64940368pfb.16.2016.12.10.06.02.00 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 10 Dec 2016 06:02:01 -0800 (PST) X-Google-Original-From: Tino Calancha X-X-Sender: calancha@calancha-pc In-Reply-To: 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:126798 Archived-At: This message is in MIME format. The first part should be readable text, while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools. --8323329-378543943-1481378521=:22291 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8BIT On Sat, 10 Dec 2016, Philipp Stephani wrote: > > > Tino Calancha schrieb am Sa., 10. Dez. 2016 um 08:45 Uhr: > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > 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. Sorry, i meant above the order of 'assign the bindings' is up to the implementation. > 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. Yes, it's worth to remark than in the manual. --8323329-378543943-1481378521=:22291--