From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Alan Mackenzie Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Change of Lisp syntax for "fancy" quotes in Emacs 27? Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2018 09:14:22 +0000 Message-ID: <20181006091422.GA4855@ACM> References: <83y3bc2378.fsf@gnu.org> <73c02cbb-888f-478c-a231-923aa43c093e@default> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1538817920 6302 195.159.176.226 (6 Oct 2018 09:25:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2018 09:25:20 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Cc: npostavs@users.sourceforge.net, Eli Zaretskii , Paul Eggert , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 06 11:25:15 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1g8ipn-0001WH-CP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2018 11:25:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38456 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g8irt-0001K7-R8 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2018 05:27:25 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53906) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g8irP-00010s-D8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2018 05:26:56 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g8ild-0007Tu-I4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2018 05:21:04 -0400 Original-Received: from colin.muc.de ([193.149.48.1]:51434 helo=mail.muc.de) by eggs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g8ilc-0007Sl-Kf for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2018 05:20:57 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail 73647 invoked by uid 3782); 6 Oct 2018 09:20:52 -0000 Original-Received: from acm.muc.de (p5B146974.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [91.20.105.116]) by colin.muc.de (tmda-ofmipd) with ESMTP; Sat, 06 Oct 2018 11:20:51 +0200 Original-Received: (qmail 4884 invoked by uid 1000); 6 Oct 2018 09:14:22 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <73c02cbb-888f-478c-a231-923aa43c093e@default> X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/1.1.12 (Macallan) X-Primary-Address: acm@muc.de X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: FreeBSD 9.x [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 193.149.48.1 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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:230245 Archived-At: Hello, Drew. Just a quick point. On Sat, Oct 06, 2018 at 00:20:27 +0000, Drew Adams wrote: [ .... ] > This is a judgment call, but we should _let Lisp judge_ > about syntax errors, based on, well, its own syntax. If you > use (let (foo  foo)...), where there is a no-break space > between foo and foo, so be it. That's a single symbol, > `foo foo'. Do we even allow the syntax (let ((foo))...)? If we do, then why? There's (let (foo)...) and (let ((foo nil))...) for binding a symbol to nil. We made (setq foo) invalid some while ago. Why not similarly make (let ((foo))...) invalid? That would solve at least part of this problem, is easy to do. and is almost certainly harmless. -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).