From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Philip Kaludercic Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Let clause with defvar Date: Thu, 05 Sep 2024 10:32:21 +0000 Message-ID: <87cyliwfuy.fsf@posteo.net> References: <9EGMQRUSCtf_OJp3XtqFKZzdln94g30r9_RPWx9rhwYKpoIiyHBVJEWdY3sMgF5dl746AtbrDDVEkcxOPZLCvjm_VCLmeW8WBGFpTek90O4=@protonmail.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="28674"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Heime via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor To: Heime Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Sep 05 12:33:24 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-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 1sm9no-0007Fx-5d for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 05 Sep 2024 12:33:24 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sm9n2-0007X6-3m; Thu, 05 Sep 2024 06:32:36 -0400 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 1sm9mw-0007U4-5C for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Sep 2024 06:32:30 -0400 Original-Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sm9mt-0008Fi-Kd for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Sep 2024 06:32:29 -0400 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 96D0A240028 for ; Thu, 5 Sep 2024 12:32:22 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1725532342; bh=8b7OaGDmDBFQ4YtAAx+j4SmX8duI3HKMW+nM1AcaqsE=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Autocrypt:OpenPGP:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version: Content-Type:From; b=bZdnLRf+nF0UXu41E1kUwpT4KFJwkmvMjHMDYaaWlUCP8Qgifb8e+JM8+tWyO0FG9 UmGtd+fjmPTCji5RwvfgSX1vRc54rvytRZPlKo1SOCTp0SDEU5spWph/+Yowc02EJF UTHSCPb0SbL23gk0G9jL4QqNGS4wTYtlfnFKcGiBzDKG2mx065Q1EfiUItLwO+cgUF Ew9FloSwwVMSnGTBIk+LC9v+NopHy90ZUU1ZlGA84wWAm+kUjfLI6ar9eJwvu/FkjL kNRJXtSfbITypKfYjwHFI7SRWorGQUpLwnNR3US51mwOKHefGEzgmOymYE2JK+j045 hj2KrPwzkk4Eg== Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4WzwfG08TBz9rxB; Thu, 5 Sep 2024 12:32:21 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <9EGMQRUSCtf_OJp3XtqFKZzdln94g30r9_RPWx9rhwYKpoIiyHBVJEWdY3sMgF5dl746AtbrDDVEkcxOPZLCvjm_VCLmeW8WBGFpTek90O4=@protonmail.com> (Heime's message of "Wed, 04 Sep 2024 00:49:54 +0000") Autocrypt: addr=philipk@posteo.net; keydata= mDMEZBBQQhYJKwYBBAHaRw8BAQdAHJuofBrfqFh12uQu0Yi7mrl525F28eTmwUDflFNmdui0QlBo aWxpcCBLYWx1ZGVyY2ljIChnZW5lcmF0ZWQgYnkgYXV0b2NyeXB0LmVsKSA8cGhpbGlwa0Bwb3N0 ZW8ubmV0PoiWBBMWCAA+FiEEDg7HY17ghYlni8XN8xYDWXahwukFAmQQUEICGwMFCQHhM4AFCwkI BwIGFQoJCAsCBBYCAwECHgECF4AACgkQ8xYDWXahwulikAEA77hloUiSrXgFkUVJhlKBpLCHUjA0 mWZ9j9w5d08+jVwBAK6c4iGP7j+/PhbkxaEKa4V3MzIl7zJkcNNjHCXmvFcEuDgEZBBQQhIKKwYB BAGXVQEFAQEHQI5NLiLRjZy3OfSt1dhCmFyn+fN/QKELUYQetiaoe+MMAwEIB4h+BBgWCAAmFiEE Dg7HY17ghYlni8XN8xYDWXahwukFAmQQUEICGwwFCQHhM4AACgkQ8xYDWXahwukm+wEA8cml4JpK NeAu65rg+auKrPOP6TP/4YWRCTIvuYDm0joBALw98AMz7/qMHvSCeU/hw9PL6u6R2EScxtpKnWof z4oM OpenPGP: id=philipk@posteo.net; url="https://keys.openpgp.org/vks/v1/by-email/philipk@posteo.net"; preference=signencrypt Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.67.36.65; envelope-from=philipk@posteo.net; helo=mout01.posteo.de X-Spam_score_int: -43 X-Spam_score: -4.4 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.4 / 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_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.help:147910 Archived-At: Heime writes: > Consider two versions of setting xiakos. The let defines local bindings. > Can the let block be placed outside a defvar or inside. Does it make a > difference ? Although defvar is used to define global variables, can it > be used to evaluating local bindings like let ? Which version would one > suggest ? > > (let ( (orella-waypt > (questor-path-snip marshal-waypt "orella")) ) > > (defvar xiakos > `( ("GLXKS" . ,(concat orella-waypt "/xiakos")) > ("GLXKS" . ,(concat orella-waypt "/xiakos")) )) > > and > > (defvar xiakos > > (let ( (orella-waypt (questor-path-snip marshal-waypt "orella")) ) > > `( ("GLXKS" . ,(concat orella-waypt "/xiakos")) > ("GLXKS" . ,(concat orella-waypt "/xiakos")) )) I'd place the `let' inside the `defvar', because it makes it easier to evaluate the value manually without changing the value of the variable. -- Philip Kaludercic on siskin