From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Andy Moreton Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#31052: 26.0.91; Improve documentation of inline-letevals Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2018 14:18:32 +0100 Message-ID: References: <87a7uj24kk.fsf@runbox.com> <83efjv4ggx.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=shift_jis Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1522847919 30947 195.159.176.226 (4 Apr 2018 13:18:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 13:18:39 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.0.91 (windows-nt) To: 31052@debbugs.gnu.org Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 04 15:18:35 2018 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 1f3iJ6-0007vM-Qt for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 15:18:33 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57927 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f3iLC-0002X6-C2 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 09:20:42 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33281) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f3iJf-0001G6-Tn for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 09:19:08 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f3iJa-0001G3-8E for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 09:19:07 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:58180) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f3iJa-0001Fu-4E for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 09:19:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1f3iJZ-0000ne-Th for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 09:19:01 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org In-Reply-To: <87a7uj24kk.fsf@runbox.com> Resent-From: Andy Moreton Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2018 13:19:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 31052 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: X-Debbugs-Original-To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-Received: via spool by submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B.15228479393066 (code B ref -1); Wed, 04 Apr 2018 13:19:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Apr 2018 13:18:59 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37844 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1f3iJX-0000nO-Do for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 09:18:59 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:42275) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1f3iJV-0000nB-Py for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 09:18:58 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f3iJP-0001Ek-GV for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 09:18:52 -0400 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::11]:41590) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f3iJP-0001Ee-DD for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 09:18:51 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33230) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f3iJM-00013L-Ap for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 09:18:51 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f3iJG-0001Cd-HS for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 09:18:48 -0400 Original-Received: from [195.159.176.226] (port=42406 helo=blaine.gmane.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f3iJG-0001Bm-AR for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 09:18:42 -0400 Original-Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1f3iH7-0005cc-L3 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 15:16:30 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 51 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:NFzrJ5iGszr5Zs1p1N4p3XRbzr4= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x 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:144884 Archived-At: On Wed 04 Apr 2018, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> From: Gemini Lasswell >> Date: Tue, 03 Apr 2018 17:33:31 -0700 >> >> I just got acquainted with inline-letevals and found its description >> in the Elisp manual confusing because the purpose of the macro is not >> stated, and it is described as similar to 'let' without mention of an >> important difference in what happens to the elements of the bindings >> list which are symbols. >> >> Here's a patch to functions.texi where I've attempted to clarify the >> description. > > Thanks, but your text left me confused, perhaps because it mixes the > details of the syntax and semantics with the explanation of why and > how to use them, and what is the result of such usage. These should > be generally kept separate for clarity. > > How about if you first tell informally what information is missing > from the original text, and then we see how to augment that by adding > the missing bits? The same node in the elisp manual has this: Functions defined via edefine-inlinef have several advantages with respect to macros defined by edefsubstf or edefmacrof: and this: | They behave in a more predictable way than ecl-defsubstf (*note (cl)Argument Lists::). It would be more consistent to use defsubst or cl-defsubst in both places. Also, while looking at inline-letevals in inline.el, I noticed that the preceeding macros inline--leteval and inline--letlisteval mention the wrong symbol name in their error messages: (defmacro inline--leteval (_var-exp &rest _body) (declare (indent 1) (debug (sexp &rest body))) (error "inline-letevals can only be used within define-inline")) (defmacro inline--letlisteval (_list &rest _body) (declare (indent 1) (debug (sexp &rest body))) (error "inline-letevals can only be used within define-inline")) Perhaps these typos can be fixed before the release. AndyM