From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Philip Kaludercic Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [External] : Re: [NonGNU ELPA] New package: Denote-Refs Date: Mon, 19 Dec 2022 21:08:11 +0000 Message-ID: <874jtr5cg4.fsf@posteo.net> References: <87a63jl5i2.fsf@disroot.org> <87ili75o0p.fsf@posteo.net> <87a63jp92j.fsf@disroot.org> <878rj35hh0.fsf@posteo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="35120"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Akib Azmain Turja , Emacs Developer List To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Dec 19 22:09:01 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1p7NNc-0008rO-KE for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 19 Dec 2022 22:09:00 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p7NMv-00028Q-BG; Mon, 19 Dec 2022 16:08:17 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p7NMt-00028B-GQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Dec 2022 16:08:15 -0500 Original-Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1p7NMr-00035I-AR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 19 Dec 2022 16:08:15 -0500 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 69C12240026 for ; Mon, 19 Dec 2022 22:08:07 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1671484090; bh=cXNOyIFfvPMO4pjb+1SII4+83RwXFles1d5YcSGY2eY=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:From; b=XynQDukMNM7J1aFqDFHlL0J40MoH5CcSiV2RsmwYvZytHCvU0SLLFB57kWWtuCMYy DqgAjUJdL20P9sb6XrmkRVEv8OuDUmuxgSl0Iz1xqihxP9ny/w6z1VjXbtvoWX8bMQ iA2l5hqpcqZJ/omz3nqXj+mk5tx/sLWRQYvZtJsrTC4owV4YTYQmUQF9TzveA/UcfU 4YHmw70DxmGvv9z1bQxYTvPIUdW5GhmR1pe2C9vq5U/ysSKRqhsKFrj1+vB+SyBPvJ Gs8DZFG8Z5aKutt/SEMQBVQLACld11Bis+EvWkoBw5ZJWB17LV6PLsKzL93C9eLIO3 YUGcbTA7264PQ== Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4NbXNl469sz6tmm; Mon, 19 Dec 2022 22:08:07 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: (Drew Adams's message of "Mon, 19 Dec 2022 20:20:35 +0000") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.67.36.65; envelope-from=philipk@posteo.net; helo=mout01.posteo.de X-Spam_score_int: -43 X-Spam_score: -4.4 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:301671 Archived-At: Drew Adams writes: >> >> -(defgroup denote-refs nil >> >> +(defgroup denote-refs '() >> > Why? >> >> It is just a personal preference of mine, since the argument MEMBER is >> an alist. I think that '() makes it more explicit that this is a list, >> as opposed to nil which might also be taken to be a truth value. I >> guess () would do as well... > > Yes, () would do as well - in fact better, since it > doesn't suggest any possibility that '() represents > something different from (). > > You don't quote nil or t, do you? Or 42 or "foo" or > :bar. Why quote () then? In this case it doesn't matter, because () is self-evaluating, but (foo) isn't, so to me it seems more consistent to treat () as a list where I want to make it explicit that I am inhibiting evaluation. > As the manual says: > > As far as the Lisp reader is concerned, '()' and 'nil' > are identical: they stand for the same object, the > symbol 'nil'. The different ways of writing the symbol > are intended entirely for human readers. After the > Lisp reader has read either '()' or 'nil', there is no > way to determine which representation was actually > written by the programmer. > > In this manual, we write '()' when we wish to emphasize > that it means the empty list, and we write 'nil' when > we wish to emphasize that it means the truth value FALSE. > That is a good convention to use in Lisp programs also. > > And yes, it's a good convention -- +1 for that.