From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [Emacs-diffs] /srv/bzr/emacs/trunk r104642: * src/process.c (Fset_process_buffer): Clarify return value in docstring. Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 10:13:34 -0400 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1308668597 18788 80.91.229.12 (21 Jun 2011 15:03:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 21 Jun 2011 15:03:17 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Deniz Dogan , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Juanma Barranquero Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jun 21 17:03:11 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QZ2Tu-0003s4-4D for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 17:03:10 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41752 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QZ2Tt-0006ml-4x for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 11:03:09 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:55454) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QZ1i5-0001Uy-TG for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 10:13:47 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QZ1i4-0001Pl-JM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 10:13:45 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.183]:12460 helo=ironport2-out.pppoe.ca) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QZ1i4-0001PS-9G for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 10:13:44 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av0EAFGmAE5FxL0s/2dsb2JhbABUpm54iHPAMoYqBJlfhAWEJA X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.65,401,1304308800"; d="scan'208";a="116771488" Original-Received: from 69-196-189-44.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO ceviche.home) ([69.196.189.44]) by ironport2-out.pppoe.ca with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 21 Jun 2011 10:13:39 -0400 Original-Received: by ceviche.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 4BF9C660F1; Tue, 21 Jun 2011 11:13:34 -0300 (ART) In-Reply-To: (Juanma Barranquero's message of "Mon, 20 Jun 2011 21:53:28 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 206.248.154.183 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:140779 Archived-At: >> I can't find a single example of Elisp code in Emacs that does not >> ignore the return value of set-process-buffer > Hardly surprising, as it was undocumented. People usually aren't afraid to use undocumented features. >> (and that's a good thing). > Perhaps. Do you oppose also to using the return value of other > side-effecting functions or special forms, As a general rule, yes. > like `setq'? Because there's no shortage of "(if (setq", "(and (setq", > "(or (setq" in the sources (341, 387 and 54 instances, respectively). Indeed, setq is used this way fairly often, so it's pointless to try and oppose it. As a matter of fact, I do use this sometimes myself. Stefan