Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen@web.de> writes:

> > easy-mmode.el:
> >
> >       (pcase keyw
> > 	(`:group (setq group (nconc group (list :group (pop keys)))))
> > 	(`:global (setq keys (cdr keys)))
> > 	(_ (push keyw extra-keywords) (push (pop keys) extra-keywords))))
> >
> > (Aren't keywords supposed to be self-quoting? then why they are
> > explicitly quoted?)

> These are all cases I would want to fix, but unless the whole pcase form
> can be trivially rewritten as cl-case, I want to leave pcase, really.

Here is the first patch addressing quoted selfquoting patterns.  I left
out cl-generic.el which is distributed via Gnu Elpa because selfquoting
pattern types are two years younger than pcase is.

Is the commit message ok as it is?  Or should I list the changed files
to say "All callers changed" every time?

Here and there the patch also fixes indentation of surrounding code.

In the next step I want to replace `DOESNT-UNQUOTE -> DOESNT-UNQUOTE,
though we have one opinion that didn't want me to do this so that the
code looks more frightening and people are warned.  I don't think it is
necessary to warn people about pcase, and I don't think warning people
about hard to read code by making the code even harder to read is a good
thing ;-)

What's then left is the task to replace all pcase forms that can be
trivially rewritten by using case or cond/assoc.  I must admit that
I'm very skeptical about this now.  Not only that we would only replace
exactly these pcase occurrences that are really trivial to read for
anybody, which could be, at the end, counterproductive for those people
who dislike pcase because the pcase forms left are the harder ones (Eli,
I know you don't think like that).

I also saw that people have very different likings, independent from
pcase.  Say, we have one third of people who want to keep pcase in these
cases, one third who want to replace it with cl-case, and one third who
want cond or assoc instead.  We have a clear majority against pcase.
But we also have a clear majority against cl-case, and a majority
against cond/assoc.

With all input I got, I came to the conclusion that what we have is
quite ok: A pcase with branches whose condition all look like 'CONSTANT
is not too hard to read for anyone.  I saw there are pros and cons for
and against keeping these in the code, but I didn't get the impression
that one side clearly prevails.

Eli and Stefan, if you could agree about something I should do, or if
the maintainer(s) tell me I should do these replacement, I still offer
to do it, but I don't think we came to any conclusion yet.

And here is the first patch: