From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Native line numbers landed on master Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2017 19:04:54 +0300 Message-ID: <831spnj6xl.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83k23jl5ra.fsf@gnu.org> <87r2xqo8p7.fsf@lylat> <83lgnxk7v6.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1499789292 14535 195.159.176.226 (11 Jul 2017 16:08:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2017 16:08:12 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 11 18:08:08 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1dUxhj-0003K0-EQ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2017 18:08:03 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47291 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dUxho-0005aZ-RZ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2017 12:08:08 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42415) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dUxeq-0003Py-DS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2017 12:05:14 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dUxel-0002Q7-FS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Jul 2017 12:05:04 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:36212) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dUxel-0002Q3-Cj; Tue, 11 Jul 2017 12:04:59 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1358 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1dUxek-0003jh-Ph; Tue, 11 Jul 2017 12:04:59 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Stefan Monnier on Tue, 11 Jul 2017 11:27:18 -0400) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:216488 Archived-At: > From: Stefan Monnier > Date: Tue, 11 Jul 2017 11:27:18 -0400 > > > Looks okay, although I'd drop the # part in the below: > > (add-hook 'pre-command-hook #'display-line-numbers-update-width nil t)) > > Recent Elisp changes have rather gone the other way (adding a # rather > than removing them). Part of the reason is that lexical-binding gives > different semantics to '(lambda ...) and #'(lambda ...), other part is > that cl-flet and cl-labels also give different semantics to 'foo and > #'foo. > > Finally, if you keep the # part, the byte-compiler will be able to check > that you spelled the function correctly (and warn you if that function > is not known to exist). Without this being documented anywhere (AFAICS), how can we ever hope to educate our users (starting with myself) about this?