From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Sean Whitton Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Is this a bug in while-let or do I missunderstand it? Date: Wed, 13 Nov 2024 17:56:00 +0800 Message-ID: <874j4bfoen.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> References: <86ldxrliau.fsf@gnu.org> <865xot2y1d.fsf@fastmail.fm> <86ldxoiqzr.fsf@gnu.org> <86ttccvwwj.fsf@fastmail.fm> <87bjyjfowt.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="5080"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , arthur.miller@live.com, ams@gnu.org, yuri.v.khan@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Joost Kremers Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Nov 13 11:04:15 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1tBAEQ-00013r-FQ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 13 Nov 2024 11:04:14 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tBADW-0006Nc-Ss; Wed, 13 Nov 2024 05:03:19 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tBADV-0006NT-IO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Nov 2024 05:03:17 -0500 Original-Received: from sendmail.purelymail.com ([34.202.193.197]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tBADT-0007go-Qq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Nov 2024 05:03:17 -0500 DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=0fNBPKaGTnRGsOirCuXiLUtSM+6po2wdq0WBx4tFNBhQLia4e16aHSe9O9TBRKQ+igVEMekr7bNZbh2oUB25UQTqHEYk0AWjRFSfE6e/CxOKCeOuUJwY4xEPdPhkiW6XGpvzCoSukTktaHgK2kS5FRANkn6XP14eHh8iVhn77vb7o7A9lGfPnNoUULmA4lPKKiMIMzB9zGeAtsgNvhPVIlHsnG+jzi83yGhHH3djRxf9YZFs25GVGqloFhI6tREI00YJnGt5NBWXRSKZjASlbOR1fp9I4Q4Xst2LMEVeXyols4nFz+ErO8hPziJLqBSmRa8benBrWsARs0XOQDLBWg==; s=purelymail2; d=spwhitton.name; v=1; bh=9nrV1/vYZyr6HYoc5YN8X/qmpT+5wR7IMN+IwlMFSB4=; h=Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date; DKIM-Signature: a=rsa-sha256; b=lo3NipLq/kcb6fn5zxi4ga9PU89QUXkiWzV0DLCMOTV9eJhFQoHUAeLtUUDnx4Qqz3I6xk4pi8ZqmhwSRRZz/eco+27Viiv037ode4Yp5WIRx9CiumHT9tU3lTvBbsirph0Y03dMQ7hv4ugFLAJ97NWuumh6HQwNDnQ8U3uKnYZ9aP7qXSRGeo6CBz+awZ+QWPz1/b42e08vq3j3nbzarK37PwTzn3vCHy8dYYnT1N7WbimoYJ0IKp4Yv/JOHgZ2ceLpFu5q/xZt3j1LPA5lYeLIeEU3rQbJdzEBJvPQzNh5oJRBddVPrqCcXGjmAekQolSJ8Nq3/xq1oCrHNahwzg==; s=purelymail2; d=purelymail.com; v=1; bh=9nrV1/vYZyr6HYoc5YN8X/qmpT+5wR7IMN+IwlMFSB4=; h=Feedback-ID:Received:Received:From:To:Subject:Date; Feedback-ID: 20115:3760:null:purelymail X-Pm-Original-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Received: by smtp.purelymail.com (Purelymail SMTP) with ESMTPSA id -976745814; (version=TLSv1.3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384); Wed, 13 Nov 2024 10:03:06 +0000 (UTC) Original-Received: by melete.silentflame.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 36B237E3D9A; Wed, 13 Nov 2024 17:56:00 +0800 (CST) In-Reply-To: <87bjyjfowt.fsf@melete.silentflame.com> (Sean Whitton's message of "Wed, 13 Nov 2024 17:45:06 +0800") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=34.202.193.197; envelope-from=spwhitton@spwhitton.name; helo=sendmail.purelymail.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:325441 Archived-At: Hello, On Wed 13 Nov 2024 at 05:45pm +08, Sean Whitton wrote: > Please put the "like let*" back in (the first change in your patch). > There is one person who dislikes it but I think the average reader of > the Elisp reference will benefit. Oops -- you just moved it. I have one further comment on your patch: > Some Lisp programmers follow the convention that @code{and} and > -@code{and-let*} are for forms evaluated for return value, and > +@code{and-let*} are for forms evaluated for their return value, and > @code{when} and @code{when-let*} are for forms evaluated for side-effect > with returned values ignored. This change renders the sentence grammatically incorrect. It needs to be either "for return value" and "for side-effect" or "for their return values" and "for the side-effects of their evaluation". I think it's better to use the shorter one (i.e., make no changes here). -- Sean Whitton