Jordon Biondo <jordonbiondo@gmail.com> schrieb am Mo., 30. Jan. 2017 um 19:39 Uhr:

A while ago I brought up the inconstant signatures of `setq`, `setq-default` and `setq-local`. In short, I want `setq-local` to have the same signature as `setq` and `setq-local`. (setq* VAR VAL VAR VAL...)

See thread: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2015-03/msg00448.html

I appreciate Stefan's input back then, but I'd like to revisit the issue, get further input, and see if I can change some minds about the issue.

If you believe the variadic signature of `setq` and `setq-default` is not ideal, consider that backwards compatibility erases any chance that those two functions will lose that feature, and consider the benefits of being consistently wrong over being inconsistently right.

Are maintainers and users still opposed to this change? If not I'd be happy to update the patch from the previous thread.

As a user, I'm still opposed to this change. I don't think consistency is important enough in this case to justify the "worse" signature. Consistency is not a goal in itself, but should serve the goal to increase readability and lower the barriers for new contributors. I don't think that the simpler signature of setq-local is in any way confusing because of this inconsistency.