Re: Abbrevs for the most frequent elisp symbols

[Emanuel Berg <embe8573@student.uu.se>]

Marcin Borkowski <mbork@wmi.amu.edu.pl> writes:

> False assumption: that Emacs libraries contain good
> practices only. I know you dislike Emacs.SE

No, not really. I supported it from day one (verbally,
I mean). When they do a message-mode/Gnus-like
interface, I might even use it! But only once or twice
for my favorite questions so they perhaps reach a
wider audience... I can't say I like it but I don't
dislike it.

> but there was a question there about good Elisp code
> to read (to learn Elisp), and someone warned about
> reading Emacs code (especially older libraries).

That reading Emacs code in any way should be harmful
of course I don't believe in. I always emphasize
activity rather than consumption but if there is room
for any consumption reading Emacs code is a good
choice for any programmer, no doubt.

> Recently, I grepped the Emacs Lisp sources for
> occurences of `mapcar', and there is *no*
> consistency in e.g. using ' versus #', or quoted
> lambdas (which I hear are a no-no unless in special
> circumstances, like macros).

Yeah, I have no illusions that it is consistent or
perfect in the abstract sense. Of course it isn't as
so many people worked on it. Still, the definition of
good software is what it can do, or, what it enables
you to do. You can't beat that. It is good.

-- 
underground experts united