From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Emanuel Berg Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Interactive function Date: Tue, 11 Oct 2022 01:54:41 +0200 Message-ID: <87fsfvz132.fsf@dataswamp.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="16798"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:eKG8Xc6UK6ixuHaW3/CYKDqCv5w= Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 11 09:42:49 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@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 1oi9ua-0004CF-Si for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 09:42:48 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45064 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oi9uZ-0006Ar-IB for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 03:42:47 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:58610) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oi2bj-0001cX-Pc for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 10 Oct 2022 19:54:51 -0400 Original-Received: from ciao.gmane.io ([116.202.254.214]:51286) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oi2bi-0001bW-2k for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 10 Oct 2022 19:54:51 -0400 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1oi2bg-0001km-P4 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 11 Oct 2022 01:54:48 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Mail-Copies-To: never Received-SPF: pass client-ip=116.202.254.214; envelope-from=geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; helo=ciao.gmane.io X-Spam_score_int: -15 X-Spam_score: -1.6 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.6 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Mailman-Approved-At: Tue, 11 Oct 2022 03:20:21 -0400 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "help-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.help:139810 Archived-At: Thibaut Verron wrote: > I was thinking that the compiler might take offense at the > use of the function before it is properly defined. Before evaluating your function, do (describe-function #'function) But it seems you cannot do (describe-function #'#') However (describe-function (function function)) is fine :) > But on second thought, it shouldn't really be different from > resolving a recursive call. Yes: (defun describe-me () (describe-function #'describe-me) ) (defun recurse-you (n) (if (not (zerop n)) (+ n (recurse-you (1- n))) n) ) -- underground experts united https://dataswamp.org/~incal