From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Glenn Morris Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [Emacs-diffs] /srv/bzr/emacs/emacs-24 r108143: run-hooks-with-args-* do fixes (bug#12393) Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 02:49:13 -0400 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1347950962 11695 80.91.229.3 (18 Sep 2012 06:49:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2012 06:49:22 +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 Sep 18 08:49:26 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1TDrcY-0003zC-La for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 08:49:22 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33873 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TDrcU-0001ea-H5 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 02:49:18 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:58371) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TDrcR-0001eK-Un for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 02:49:16 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TDrcR-0005sC-0t for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 02:49:15 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([208.118.235.10]:36393) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TDrcQ-0005s8-U4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 02:49:14 -0400 Original-Received: from rgm by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TDrcP-00078z-9O; Tue, 18 Sep 2012 02:49:13 -0400 X-Spook: SDI Albright Chobetsu basement AMEMB assassination lynch X-Ran: OEsxqhy/V46')hjUONh>{,&[bnN.gM.n|#dBHXg*#Co)H+X47>V].LI@O|5v\4{k^/i4"l X-Hue: yellow X-Attribution: GM In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Tue, 18 Sep 2012 00:10:16 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus (www.gnus.org), GNU Emacs (www.gnu.org/software/emacs/) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 208.118.235.10 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:153373 Archived-At: Stefan Monnier wrote: >> +If the value of HOOK is nil, this function returns nil. > > That seems redundant, since if the hook is nil, all the functions on the > hook return nil. No harm in being explicit though? Since the rest of the doc begins "if HOOK has a non-nil value..." and otherwise says nothing about HOOK == nil. >> -the given arguments and its return value is returned. >> +the given arguments. Then we return nil if the function returns nil, >> +and t if it returns non-nil. > > Let's not force ourselves to return t. IOW `non-nil' would be better. I thought about that, but wanted to make it clear that we do not return the same non-nil value as the function. That was what the bug report was about. (Althought that is how it behaved until 24.1, when it was changed with no annoucement and no doc update.)