From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: master 48ac40e60e: ; Fix last change. Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2022 14:42:28 -0400 Message-ID: References: <166049949398.16955.13217655219158269477@vcs2.savannah.gnu.org> <20220814175134.47827C09BFD@vcs2.savannah.gnu.org> <8335dyk779.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="14240"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Aug 14 20:43:36 2022 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 1oNIaG-0003Wq-AX for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 14 Aug 2022 20:43:36 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54618 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oNIaF-0005Fv-E5 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 14 Aug 2022 14:43:35 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:50072) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oNIZM-0004Xs-SY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 14 Aug 2022 14:42:40 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:13806) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oNIZK-0005fj-6O; Sun, 14 Aug 2022 14:42:39 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 743B410008C; Sun, 14 Aug 2022 14:42:35 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id B1FE0100121; Sun, 14 Aug 2022 14:42:29 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1660502549; bh=8MguO1ieNpYpxUyAG86hin8QkY7EKxhAoTdns2NMWBA=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=iA8qUfuwkEmEX6u2EP144P2WNJumzhiLIq1ati2G/gJZwxTaN6aLSJ9gYhdNBg0X+ xDsVVT5Wg9zQDAIZkjQmLDJxVi0CajmQLPfuh2Xr/sEsnEkJyd8D/0131sb8GbK/w+ 76JMOM4W8cYz7OelbkyWo9aSX/FNLqfB/8Zq6sRtJZEKlvdf3pdrmG4HDbexIAaXbW bbrGe2cO+ov+rkaIYlzneZH0cqVys73S/UKLkHP889IZgY43eaAOajiDX+G/f9l70Z TWn+y1SbnpwhgIq2FmlVVhfHbBhlY7RvGzM/GX6cjqSBbhPThjo4EsRiCa+Q2UbXdf ddUAu+Dghdrhg== Original-Received: from pastel (unknown [45.72.195.111]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8470012025D; Sun, 14 Aug 2022 14:42:29 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <8335dyk779.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sun, 14 Aug 2022 21:31:38 +0300") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:293459 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii [2022-08-14 21:31:38] wrote: >> From: Stefan Monnier >> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org >> Date: Sun, 14 Aug 2022 14:16:02 -0400 >> >> > +This returns non-nil if its argument is either a built-in, or a >> > +byte-compiled, or a natively-compiled function object, or a function >> > +loaded from a dynamic module. >> >> Funny: I find this rather hard to understand compared to my >> original wording. E.g. a reader might wonder what other cases there >> could be and why they don't return non-nil. > Are there other cases? Obviously, there are the cases of a process, a marker, a vector, ... (and even more obviously an interpreted function), but my point is that if I imagine myself as a reader who's not knowledgeable about all those kinds of functions, I have no idea whether those 4 different cases cover "all the cases except an interpreted function". >> IOW, I prefer an "intentional" description over the "extensional" one >> you installed. > The original wording was too vague. Such a specific API cannot be > documented in such vague terms. It's not a very specific API. It's a kind of "abstract super class", so in my book it should be defined not by enumerating its current subclasses but by giving a meaningful way to decide whether a given class should be a subclass or not. Stefan