From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "rgb" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Mis-features of let (was Defadvice use) Date: 18 Apr 2005 20:48:47 -0700 Organization: http://groups.google.com Message-ID: <1113882527.264397.292310@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> References: <1113844268.703229.310830@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <1113851147.155814.314630@g14g2000cwa.googlegroups.com> <87y8bfzx9z.fsf-monnier+gnu.emacs.help@gnu.org> <1113869741.838603.250620@o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com> <87pswry5py.fsf-monnier+gnu.emacs.help@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1" X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1113882386 31538 80.91.229.2 (19 Apr 2005 03:46:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 03:46:26 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Apr 19 05:46:24 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DNjgo-0005hu-Uy for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 19 Apr 2005 05:46:19 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DNjl0-0006tm-1f for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 18 Apr 2005 23:50:38 -0400 Original-Path: shelby.stanford.edu!newsfeed.stanford.edu!postnews.google.com!o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail Original-Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help Original-Lines: 39 Original-NNTP-Posting-Host: 63.229.223.29 Original-X-Trace: posting.google.com 1113882531 7337 127.0.0.1 (19 Apr 2005 03:48:51 GMT) Original-X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Original-NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 19 Apr 2005 03:48:51 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: G2/0.2 Complaints-To: groups-abuse@google.com Injection-Info: o13g2000cwo.googlegroups.com; posting-host=63.229.223.29; posting-account=C7LM4w0AAAD23IRuMuUUJVCLQTuHhTK8 Original-Xref: shelby.stanford.edu gnu.emacs.help:130238 Original-To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:25806 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.help:25806 > bla bla Yes. Communication with 'inteligent beings' is, for me, quite often an extreemly difficult and error prone task. Believe it or not I spent over 2 hrs on that post trying to be clear. 3 on this. > Another way is to post here an example of a specific behavior which > you find counter intuitive (basically write a bug report, but asking > why it works that way, rather than claiming it's a bug ;-). I didn't say it *was* a bug, but "a bug waiting to happen". Perhaps thats an idiom you're not familiar with. Sorry. But my other statement should have made it clear I wasn't claiming it was a bug: "Since it appears to be by design, I'd be terribly curious to see any archive of discussions concerning why this is appropriate behavior." > It'd also be helpful to cite relevant parts of the elisp manual > which lead you to your mis-understanding, so we can try and improve > it. So your saying "no mention in any Elisp manual section that covers plists or symbol function cells about this behavior" isn't specific enough? I'm sure your not implying I should have actually listed every section that refers to either of these subjects so I can't tell what more you expected me to cite. I also expressed "The `feature' is only _implied_, not documented." IOW, no place (as in anywhere in the user or reference manual) do I find a warning or even a passing mention that a symbol, created by let or let* is handled differently from a symbol created through set, fset, any of the def... forms, intern, etc. >>From what you've said (and experiments point to you being correct), no one should ever use put, fset, setplist etc on any symbol whose origin might be let or let* since the resulting behavior would apparently be undefined (as evidenced by the example in my previous post). Hence, a bug waiting to happen.