From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#40968: 28.0.50; (apply nil) Date: Wed, 06 May 2020 17:03:59 +0300 Message-ID: <83lfm5kvn4.fsf@gnu.org> References: Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="72874"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 40968@debbugs.gnu.org, pipcet@gmail.com To: Stefan Kangas Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed May 06 16:05:11 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-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 1jWKff-000IpL-Lv for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 06 May 2020 16:05:11 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36092 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jWKfe-00083E-Ke for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 06 May 2020 10:05:10 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:52860) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jWKfW-00081G-IW for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 06 May 2020 10:05:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:57448) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jWKfW-0005xU-91 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 06 May 2020 10:05:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jWKfW-0001xd-38 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 06 May 2020 10:05:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 06 May 2020 14:05:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 40968 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 40968-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B40968.15887738667490 (code B ref 40968); Wed, 06 May 2020 14:05:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 40968) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 May 2020 14:04:26 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40761 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jWKev-0001wi-Ny for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 06 May 2020 10:04:26 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:49758) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jWKet-0001wT-La for 40968@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 06 May 2020 10:04:24 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:55590) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jWKeo-0005rJ-2o; Wed, 06 May 2020 10:04:18 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=3368 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1jWKen-0004Fm-FT; Wed, 06 May 2020 10:04:17 -0400 In-Reply-To: (message from Stefan Kangas on Wed, 6 May 2020 06:02:45 -0700) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:179816 Archived-At: > From: Stefan Kangas > Date: Wed, 6 May 2020 06:02:45 -0700 > Cc: 40968@debbugs.gnu.org > > Pip Cet writes: > > > (apply FUNCTION ARGUMENT &rest ARGUMENTS), I guess. I missed it in the > > first patch. > > Thanks. > > FWIW, I still think we should avoid changing the function signature if > at all possible. I agree. I also think it isn't enough to check only here and in ELPA: 'apply' is a very popular function, and is used very widely. I won't be surprised if there were more of these usage cases that would be broken by such a change in the signature. Can we instead identify the problematic usage and signal an error?