From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Michael Heerdegen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: `thunk-let'? Date: Fri, 24 Nov 2017 00:41:47 +0100 Message-ID: <873754bm10.fsf@web.de> References: <87infp9z6j.fsf@web.de> <87zi90eehg.fsf@web.de> <87o9ocd6s4.fsf@web.de> <87wp2zcwm2.fsf@web.de> <87mv3vwb2c.fsf_-_@web.de> <87h8tnowl4.fsf@web.de> <83vai3asgt.fsf@gnu.org> <83mv3eb85m.fsf@gnu.org> <87a7zdbsyf.fsf@web.de> <873755hbpr.fsf@web.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1511480557 29883 195.159.176.226 (23 Nov 2017 23:42:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2017 23:42:37 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Pip Cet Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Nov 24 00:42:33 2017 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 1eI18V-00077G-Ik for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 24 Nov 2017 00:42:27 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46639 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eI18d-00081E-1e for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 23 Nov 2017 18:42:35 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45761) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eI182-000814-31 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 23 Nov 2017 18:41:58 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eI17z-0007q2-GZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 23 Nov 2017 18:41:58 -0500 Original-Received: from mout.web.de ([212.227.15.4]:58105) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eI17z-0007j0-5Z; Thu, 23 Nov 2017 18:41:55 -0500 Original-Received: from drachen.dragon ([88.66.201.17]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb002 [213.165.67.108]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0Md4ZG-1eZ02r32t0-00IEjg; Fri, 24 Nov 2017 00:41:47 +0100 In-Reply-To: (Pip Cet's message of "Thu, 23 Nov 2017 16:34:05 +0000") X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:7X7gEXO+cZ0KYo56dOklGLH+NMU1B1BsRIHSieqSlHD5AJw6Bix REdkP8mwCUU6/foMquESYtK977mQLcuYrMNM0RCB4cpvrHnSXYhCG+qzFdxFN695Q1VQNcr hADLYf6vrjZ4Fxuz1HY12F1fEalbJMlBmrwHbWUueOlYI6hc6nC15YMmsvkCLi31/MnzmHP XqFJlxstiVfOfCd2zfDqA== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V01:K0:UYpJC32qZX4=:3ayhY4RhprQJe8vqWwevQt iUl56pQ+oAbMuU5jv8UzrMbaqDakxwrKAUkli/TOUHj7cUiDZf5FU00DhBcOnLknmx1jO7M2x mUgCS7tfHXsHa9tjN4Mn9IxZplbwcYSTa94EpauFcPC094LJWVaUR+SUM7BigUY/sYkrNrmvn vwQ9cGfihRl0rZQlu3jaBge0YFOCwNSYfSxFf2JjHhxQZTvcLlGus9yglOxqSryKVj9REJxuX LidM/hshZ1lP2Ak+vaDpVSbVuVRNLSppNZSifnWW44kasH+osud8IdHWQVOVrymslz1C+eHK9 S4xdOfwkWIiIIpc49LMUinikuKnPAxyKM2myHa5DG3I+366y1KI8xJku0x3ctCFwIBKsm1NQp gbtjIWlzwqw0pbR3EENta3VClNvU1glAuQ5kEa1CSWlDB75efiT5QRo4Y6X1LKx1cpIGD6Rvw 9WnUmAQ1AsYzy9I5T/VrnPHBMu8mh6lyXV1SGMKVKrxsxU/2wB5qEw5ELma+TmdUUIyfiKBuY a41lNgBoDj8x7T26CF68t+k9GY0cE3iYWPqCw3IcLDfeIeHHsLnCsWHxKwU9dWv70mIT7EYq0 FXI+prWeucCgL7UwRxEQPUU4lslQsFhXYiN9a0YqOXGKTBZBtzF1Ge+sz89vEox6JcP05XZg4 751GY8w0+SW0a0H1pbPvk4/02aXCvJt8DbPWzk5GF7J8O5Q7+MCYIJZtURWCPD93Bq2svsKH3 SJnYGEXRQ/8xxMxt7T+mp5IbkYeBlNkPXTspwo2CIGS+jHBd1/3TYW5cl3GOOzV4vbA1M/Zz X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 212.227.15.4 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:220414 Archived-At: Pip Cet writes: > Unless I'm missing something (there appear to be two attachments to > that last email), There was one inline for reading, and one attached for testing. > you define thunk-let and thunk-let*, but document lazy-let and > lazy-let*. Oops. Sounds the same for me right now. Thanks for noticing that. > IMHO, lazy-let is much better as a name: thunk-let doesn't describe > what it does, only how it's implemented; more importantly, > JavaScript-like Promises could also be implemented with thunks, so > it's ambiguous. What do others think about this? I had already asked if making `lazy-let' an alias to `thunk-let' would be ok (package prefix rule), but nobody had answered. A second question is: Do we really want to have the library have no autoloads? It's, at least, a bit unusual to have these things prominently described in the manual, and you have to require the library explicitly (if we keep it like this, I would have to add a note to the manual that you must require the library in order to use the described stuff). Thanks, Michael.