From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ihor Radchenko Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: cond* Date: Wed, 03 Jan 2024 15:57:22 +0000 Message-ID: <87cyui76l9.fsf@localhost> References: <87frzuae9n.fsf@posteo.net> <871qbatqc8.fsf@posteo.net> <87wmsz7lzn.fsf@posteo.net> <87edf1m7lq.fsf@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="422"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 03 16:55:17 2024 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 1rL3aP-000ATO-7G for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 03 Jan 2024 16:55:17 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rL3Zc-0004Qd-Gj; Wed, 03 Jan 2024 10:54:29 -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 1rL3ZT-0004Q1-5t for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Jan 2024 10:54:20 -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 1rL3ZN-0005Nv-QM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 03 Jan 2024 10:54:18 -0500 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 482B5240027 for ; Wed, 3 Jan 2024 16:54:11 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1704297251; bh=Y3EeZJJtDcwnXNnJC3hYWSP9w7vLm81GB5S+OZmdTCA=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version: Content-Transfer-Encoding:From; b=S3tG7g3i1vhB4Tca1lcbpBa9ZWDFVcqiTBQRcZKkZIp4wAR8sL4+C1xo9adyaohRv SKPUH+4O5V7UN6I8+G/VdHtt41hkLzjJHXpDFZ6gj79nMwrZ4ZwVWJOhLyZO1tm9sw QNc7c7J2dJEymlxtlXFZ13hFCn+D+uremymQR3PZMaXK211oTYkPM0VHPHkh+Vtvfb B1B1ZGXzckUYO3+XfjKuY3JeUXoAzYwmYVQ/lajfDFxZq9uT0cS3cnCjCvVqyOqlwF Ji8VvkEAywvbHkkIf2jK2iy5Gyuh/utyTfhoiSIyG6uG+H9fj0+l+t5pxJ9fm8lOiR ZFk8M3cvaKuSQ== Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4T4vR62qzNz9rxD; Wed, 3 Jan 2024 16:54:10 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.67.36.65; envelope-from=yantar92@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, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=unavailable 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:314503 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > > Or, better, allow VARIABLE to be in an arbitrary argument of PRED: > > I understand that in the abstract. I just don't see any syntax that > makes sense to use for it. > > > ,(PRED ARG1 ARG2 !VARIABLE ARG3 ...) > > I don't understand this syntax. `!' as no special meaning. > It cam't magically have a special meaning in a cpnd* pattern. > It would be part of the variable name. > This feature makes sense, and I've defined a syntax for it already: > > (constrain VARIABLE (PRED ARG1 ARG2 VARIABLE ARG3...)) It is technically possible to assign special meaning to !name in macros. However, I do agree that "constrain" should be good enough to the use case that I proposed. > > What about allowing a construct like ,((plist-get plist) property) th= at > > will test for PROPERTY being in PLIST? > > I do not understand what you mean by ,((plist-get plist) property). > I am simply lost here. I don't know which parts of that are supposed > to be fixed structure and which parts refer to things in the cond* call. [ I withdraw this proposal as "constrain" is good enough, but still replying to provide context for my previous idea ] I was referring to what "pred" in `pcase' does: =E2=80=98(pred FUNCTION)=E2=80=99 Matches if the predicate FUNCTION returns non-=E2=80=98nil=E2=80=99 wh= en called on EXPVAL. The test can be negated with the syntax =E2=80=98(pred (not FUNCTION))=E2=80=99. The predicate FUNCTION can have one of the follo= wing forms: function name (a symbol) Call the named function with one argument, EXPVAL. Example: =E2=80=98integerp=E2=80=99 <...> function call with N args Call the function (the first element of the function call) with N arguments (the other elements) and an additional N+1-th argument that is EXPVAL. Example: =E2=80=98(=3D 42)=E2=80=99 ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ <- this In this example, the function is =E2=80=98=3D=E2=80=99, N is one,= and the actual function call becomes: =E2=80=98(=3D 42 EXPVAL)=E2=80=99. --=20 Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode contributor, Learn more about Org mode at . Support Org development at , or support my work at