From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Arbitrary function: find the number(s) of expected arguments Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 20:39:33 +0300 Message-ID: <834mbu1mp6.fsf@gnu.org> References: <56E8906C.5050405@lanl.gov> <83y49e731p.fsf@gnu.org> <83pouj0wx8.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1458927618 23968 80.91.229.3 (25 Mar 2016 17:40:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 17:40:18 +0000 (UTC) Cc: pogonyshev@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Mar 25 18:40:13 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ajViW-0007b0-2E for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 25 Mar 2016 18:40:12 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57271 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ajViU-0005KD-HE for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 25 Mar 2016 13:40:10 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57965) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ajViG-0005K8-P8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Mar 2016 13:39:57 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ajViD-00079s-JR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Mar 2016 13:39:56 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:33878) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ajViD-00079m-Fh; Fri, 25 Mar 2016 13:39:53 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:4994 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1ajViC-0000jx-NZ; Fri, 25 Mar 2016 13:39:53 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Drew Adams on Fri, 25 Mar 2016 09:35:20 -0700 (PDT)) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:202234 Archived-At: > Date: Fri, 25 Mar 2016 09:35:20 -0700 (PDT) > From: Drew Adams > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > > >  `subr-arity' is still in the documentation, but I replaced its > > description with an advice to use `func-arity' instead. > > Again, that is wrong, IMO. It isn't. > IIUC, you _cannot_ use `func-arity' to test whether something > is a subr. You have subrp for that; using subr-arity for this purpose borders on the ridiculous. It's certainly unclean. > IOW, I am repeating the same argument I made before, when > I said that `subr-arity' should not be deprecated and > simply replaced by `func-arity'. You were wrong then, and you are wrong now. > If my argument is being rejected (in effect - in the new doc > string) then why are we not doing that openly (deprecating > `subr-arity' and replacing it with `func-arity')? Because you objected, and I'd rather not start yet another endless discussion.