Re: emacs-29 4c6653f23ae: ; * lisp/emacs-lisp/pcase.el (pcase-let*, pcase-let): Doc fix.

Re: emacs-29 4c6653f23ae: ; * lisp/emacs-lisp/pcase.el (pcase-let*, pcase-let): Doc fix.

[Stephen Berman]

On Tue, 20 Feb 2024 08:44:36 -0500 (EST) Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:

> branch: emacs-29
> commit 4c6653f23aef097e3a6ed687e21decea6c790b5e
> Author: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
> Commit: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
>
>     ; * lisp/emacs-lisp/pcase.el (pcase-let*, pcase-let): Doc fix.
> ---
>  lisp/emacs-lisp/pcase.el | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/lisp/emacs-lisp/pcase.el b/lisp/emacs-lisp/pcase.el
> index 47db2b89b9e..692c8f9b3fe 100644
> --- a/lisp/emacs-lisp/pcase.el
> +++ b/lisp/emacs-lisp/pcase.el
> @@ -261,7 +261,7 @@ As with `pcase-let', BINDINGS are of the form (PATTERN EXP), but the
>  EXP in each binding in BINDINGS can use the results of the destructuring
>  bindings that precede it in BINDINGS' order.
>
> -Each EXP should match (i.e. be of compatible structure) to its
> +Each EXP should match (i.e. be of compatible structure) its
>  respective PATTERN; a mismatch may signal an error or may go
>  undetected, binding variables to arbitrary values, such as nil."
>    (declare (indent 1)
> @@ -283,7 +283,7 @@ All EXPs are evaluated first, and then used to perform destructuring
>  bindings by matching each EXP against its respective PATTERN.  Then
>  BODY is evaluated with those bindings in effect.
>
> -Each EXP should match (i.e. be of compatible structure) to its
> +Each EXP should match (i.e. be of compatible structure) its
>  respective PATTERN; a mismatch may signal an error or may go
>  undetected, binding variables to arbitrary values, such as nil."
>    (declare (indent 1) (debug pcase-let*))

"Each EXP should match (i.e. be of compatible structure) its respective
PATTERN" is still a solecism; correct English would be "Each EXP should
match (i.e., be of compatible structure to) its respective PATTERN".  An
alternative, and perhaps more fluid, formulation is "Each EXP should
match its respective PATTERN (i.e., be of compatible structure to it)".

Steve Berman

Re: emacs-29 4c6653f23ae: ; * lisp/emacs-lisp/pcase.el (pcase-let*, pcase-let): Doc fix.

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Stephen Berman <stephen.berman@gmx.net>
> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
> Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 17:44:13 +0100
> 
> On Tue, 20 Feb 2024 08:44:36 -0500 (EST) Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> 
> > branch: emacs-29
> > commit 4c6653f23aef097e3a6ed687e21decea6c790b5e
> > Author: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
> > Commit: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
> >
> >     ; * lisp/emacs-lisp/pcase.el (pcase-let*, pcase-let): Doc fix.
> > ---
> >  lisp/emacs-lisp/pcase.el | 4 ++--
> >  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/lisp/emacs-lisp/pcase.el b/lisp/emacs-lisp/pcase.el
> > index 47db2b89b9e..692c8f9b3fe 100644
> > --- a/lisp/emacs-lisp/pcase.el
> > +++ b/lisp/emacs-lisp/pcase.el
> > @@ -261,7 +261,7 @@ As with `pcase-let', BINDINGS are of the form (PATTERN EXP), but the
> >  EXP in each binding in BINDINGS can use the results of the destructuring
> >  bindings that precede it in BINDINGS' order.
> >
> > -Each EXP should match (i.e. be of compatible structure) to its
> > +Each EXP should match (i.e. be of compatible structure) its
> >  respective PATTERN; a mismatch may signal an error or may go
> >  undetected, binding variables to arbitrary values, such as nil."
> >    (declare (indent 1)
> > @@ -283,7 +283,7 @@ All EXPs are evaluated first, and then used to perform destructuring
> >  bindings by matching each EXP against its respective PATTERN.  Then
> >  BODY is evaluated with those bindings in effect.
> >
> > -Each EXP should match (i.e. be of compatible structure) to its
> > +Each EXP should match (i.e. be of compatible structure) its
> >  respective PATTERN; a mismatch may signal an error or may go
> >  undetected, binding variables to arbitrary values, such as nil."
> >    (declare (indent 1) (debug pcase-let*))
> 
> "Each EXP should match (i.e. be of compatible structure) its respective
> PATTERN" is still a solecism;

You are welcome.

> correct English would be "Each EXP should
> match (i.e., be of compatible structure to) its respective PATTERN".  An
> alternative, and perhaps more fluid, formulation is "Each EXP should
> match its respective PATTERN (i.e., be of compatible structure to it)".

Thanks, fixed.