Re: Lambda in macrolet becomes a closure? (another breaking change in emacs:))

[Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen@web.de>]

Constantin Kulikov <zxnotdead@gmail.com> writes:

> Also, by looking at `minibuffer-with-setup-hook' [...]  There is no
> quotation of the fun, funsym or hook. Is it correct?

A good question.  But I think the definition is correct in this regard.

FUN is (bound to) an expression (since `minibuffer-with-setup-hook' is a
macro and FUN is just "pasted" into the expansion without evaluation).

If you look at the expansion (let's use a lambda form as FUN):

#+begin_src emacs-lisp
(macroexpand-1
 '(minibuffer-with-setup-hook
      (lambda () (do-some-setup))  do-this do-that))
==>
(let
    ((#2=#:fun
      (lambda nil
        (do-some-setup)))
     #1=#:setup-hook)
  (setq #1#
        (lambda nil
          (remove-hook #3='minibuffer-setup-hook #1#)
          (funcall #2#)))
  (unwind-protect
      (progn
        (add-hook #3# #1#)
        do-this do-that)
    (remove-hook #3# #1#)))
#+end_src

you see that nowhere a function value is evaluated.  In some cases, a
function expression is bound to a symbol (`let', `setq'), in the other
cases, the code refers to the binding of these symbols.


Michael.