From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: master a6b5985: Avoid duplicated character classes in rx Date: Tue, 03 Dec 2019 15:21:02 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20191203142243.9552.27513@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20191203142246.0615C20A2B@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <79A83C7D-610F-4CA4-B5E9-7F11FD8A9365@acm.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="89398"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Emacs developers To: Michael Welsh Duggan Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Dec 03 22:18:49 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1icFZJ-000N9F-Em for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 22:18:49 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:58672 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1icFZH-0008GJ-Sl for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 16:18:47 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:39799) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1icEgG-0000rK-Sk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 15:21:58 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1icEg4-0006jm-I1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 15:21:46 -0500 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:63125) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1icEfZ-0004Uc-1Y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 15:21:44 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id B9D491004C7; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 15:21:10 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id A965D100375; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 15:21:04 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1575404464; bh=pvYezKBaBlYrkSRy1t2tDj12LfgvXbZwEbnWee0ybYo=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=PZuFBWp51NJ8ftRUpED32+guP0wvCYXZrcjGCJbNWIKA/QTZe9I1SnCM/idhR+H+w EEZ9MZ3E5ZOFm0JL6UKIT9iDa6ioXwC/wXCQKXeaGEqiJjGeHOj9PkEI3Gjnb9zfZ7 08HskX81nOtVhhSHFb7WBgb63P8MGoqCiuFz0vum/MM/UEkIo6fJ+Sh0bDtv0QplWk Yuxd5JglRFBcZXQPi3QTlP5mA4DhBvWBKD7vuCsr/clLuwWubyUdubhtqonnERc95m 4ntWWa6xL603Icl3Nkm1rFZutgTciVRBlGp/PY8GW/PT7+cClFNjI3t11kOWO0k+or fuYbNb9PwDZtg== Original-Received: from pastel (unknown [45.72.228.205]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7638B121253; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 15:21:04 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Michael Welsh Duggan's message of "Tue, 03 Dec 2019 14:20:44 -0500") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 132.204.25.50 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:243091 Archived-At: >>>> I'd rather fix the code not to rely on the return value. >>> I'm sure a lot more code relies on the return value of 'push'. >> Probably, but I still think it's bad practice to use the return value of >> an operation which is fundamentally a side-effect. > But isn't that standard practice? From the elisp manual, for example: > (setq x (nreverse x)) I don't think `nreverse` is "fundamentally a side-effect": its return value is of critical importance. Similarly return values which correspond to side-information about how the side-effect was done (e.g. status or error codes) aren't subject to the above "rule". Stefan