From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: master a6b5985: Avoid duplicated character classes in rx Date: Tue, 3 Dec 2019 10:12:04 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <3f1ad5c2-1da0-4a5b-9222-b76e25d78280@default> References: <20191203142243.9552.27513@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20191203142246.0615C20A2B@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <79A83C7D-610F-4CA4-B5E9-7F11FD8A9365@acm.org> <83eexljoon.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="115730"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: mattiase@acm.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii , Juanma Barranquero Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Dec 03 20:20:05 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1icDiO-000Txe-SS for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 20:20:05 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57692 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1icDiM-0005x2-Mn for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 14:20:02 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:32854) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1icCij-0001Vw-BZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 13:16:39 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1icCf0-0000A4-8N for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 13:12:31 -0500 Original-Received: from userp2130.oracle.com ([156.151.31.86]:53642) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1icCes-0007Jq-Ok; Tue, 03 Dec 2019 13:12:23 -0500 Original-Received: from pps.filterd (userp2130.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp2130.oracle.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id xB3IBSA2108492; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 18:12:07 GMT DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=oracle.com; h=mime-version : message-id : date : from : sender : to : cc : subject : references : in-reply-to : content-type : content-transfer-encoding; s=corp-2019-08-05; bh=MZ8fgKsI2ui72LQ4jl85VFIGgL0r8PIwpbD2VtANOSM=; b=jReu4l6Hm5qQ46d4l8KfFtwl+0TGq+/DFEHWDTSNn7jHGXXge/WRh6CTdVraWvUBQ/u2 IUYvdvhpcp9vF/ai9komZp25PFsAoJWEwZV/hjg3bhiKG64JLiJxSfSwwKa30KAEAXhZ kyQFOjNJLTh4qd6ePtg89roU3p+HK2zu0S8GtTlC7RE2vh2Re6CXgVvEjsWZTv+Z4KPt xRWIXFa6p+zUHNk909zxgF3SU5hr4JQZLgJDPzAxhXeVBYcELxWwpBIBi3U9D9YRBS7G Wp0ALCdN4OWWP+nzSCEZJUCpDn8M8G3Wr+bHzerPdpG5tRkEF7ep4m6mBFAnKKU2yGkT VQ== Original-Received: from userp3030.oracle.com (userp3030.oracle.com [156.151.31.80]) by userp2130.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2wkfuu9nx6-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 03 Dec 2019 18:12:06 +0000 Original-Received: from pps.filterd (userp3030.oracle.com [127.0.0.1]) by userp3030.oracle.com (8.16.0.27/8.16.0.27) with SMTP id xB3I3u6f119265; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 18:12:06 GMT Original-Received: from userv0122.oracle.com (userv0122.oracle.com [156.151.31.75]) by userp3030.oracle.com with ESMTP id 2wn7pqfu9v-1 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Tue, 03 Dec 2019 18:12:06 +0000 Original-Received: from abhmp0001.oracle.com (abhmp0001.oracle.com [141.146.116.7]) by userv0122.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id xB3IC57u026922; Tue, 3 Dec 2019 18:12:05 GMT In-Reply-To: <83eexljoon.fsf@gnu.org> X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9.1 (1003210) [OL 16.0.4927.0 (x86)] X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9460 signatures=668685 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 suspectscore=0 malwarescore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 mlxscore=0 mlxlogscore=897 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1911140001 definitions=main-1912030135 X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=nai engine=6000 definitions=9460 signatures=668685 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 priorityscore=1501 malwarescore=0 suspectscore=0 phishscore=0 bulkscore=0 spamscore=0 clxscore=1015 lowpriorityscore=0 mlxscore=0 impostorscore=0 mlxlogscore=963 adultscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=8.0.1-1911140001 definitions=main-1912030135 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 156.151.31.86 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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:243080 Archived-At: > > So you've never written > > (if (setq var value) ...) > > ? ;-) >=20 > The return value of setq _is_ documented. Likewise `setf'. Which is why the return value of `push' is _indirectly_ documented. That indirection already commits to support of the return value (of `push'). We should specify it explicitly. As does Common Lisp (even though it too refers to `setf' in the doc). There's no reason not to say clearly and directly what `push' returns.