From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: [External] : Re: Emacs 30.0 warning from `cl-pushnew' and `memql' Date: Fri, 30 Dec 2022 19:08:58 -0500 Message-ID: References: <878ritgaty.fsf@dataswamp.org> <87o7rprvia.fsf@web.de> <87zgb913fg.fsf@dataswamp.org> <87ilhveo2s.fsf@web.de> Reply-To: Stefan Monnier Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="20403"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:c4lDnMjQCrH3HQUYX4J/XF3cdaQ= Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Dec 31 01:09:36 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 1pBPRP-0005BL-92 for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 31 Dec 2022 01:09:35 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pBPR1-0001Xa-BX; Fri, 30 Dec 2022 19:09:11 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pBPQz-0001XC-Ie for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Dec 2022 19:09:09 -0500 Original-Received: from ciao.gmane.io ([116.202.254.214]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pBPQy-0008S1-10 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 30 Dec 2022 19:09:09 -0500 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1pBPQv-0004iD-RE for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 31 Dec 2022 01:09:05 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ 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: -16 X-Spam_score: -1.7 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.7 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.help:142060 Archived-At: >> > But "very frequent", really? Any evidence that >> > that's been the case for the many users of CL > ^^ > Common Lisp >> > `case' since the mid-80s? >> >> The only "evidence" I have the number of such errors >> I've fixed over the years in other people's ELisp code. > > Which isn't an indication of such for _CL_ `case', > i.e., in the code of _Common Lisp_ users. AFAIK this is an Emacs discussion group, so yes, I'm talking about ELisp, and I used these errors I've corrected over the years as "objective evidence" that, at least for some coders, the `pcase` syntax is more intuitive than the `cl-case` syntax (which is also the syntax of `case` in Common Lisp). So far I haven't seen anyone show any kind of "objective evidence" that the `cl-case` syntax is easier to learn or use. Just unsubstantiated statements that it's simpler as if it were just obvious. Obviously it's objectively more concise. But the argument in favor of `cl-case` has never been about concision, AFAICT, always about some notion of being easier to use. AFAICT its "simplicity" is just the fact that it's a lot more restrictive, so you can get the same simplicity by resisting the urge to use the extra features of `pcase`, without having to learn another syntax. Stefan