From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Michael Heerdegen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Morally equivalent Date: Tue, 18 Oct 2022 03:01:40 +0200 Message-ID: <87h7029c7f.fsf@web.de> References: <87y1tfzhzm.fsf@undisclosedlocation.com> <877d0zfjqa.fsf@web.de> <87pmer9hrn.fsf@disroot.org> <83zgdv2bls.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="29383"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:1p4dty1AZ8vD8sKmb/kcdzVlXeM= Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 18 03:02:51 2022 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 1okb0K-0007Rg-MR for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 18 Oct 2022 03:02:48 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37238 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1okb0J-0001c5-5q for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 21:02:47 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:47526) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1okazM-0001bq-DL for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 21:01:48 -0400 Original-Received: from ciao.gmane.io ([116.202.254.214]:51072) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1okazK-0002DZ-Rn for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Oct 2022 21:01:48 -0400 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1okazJ-0005ya-5P for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Oct 2022 03:01:45 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Received-SPF: pass client-ip=116.202.254.214; envelope-from=geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; helo=ciao.gmane.io X-Spam_score_int: -13 X-Spam_score: -1.4 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.249, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.help:140105 Archived-At: Thibaut Verron writes: > It's not rigorously true, because the outcome will be different if > evaluating PLACE has side effects. But imo this is such an outlandish > scenario (if it can even happen in the first place) that it doesn't need to > be the primary focus of the docstring of push. Good point. It's just about an implementation detail. In other docstrings we just say "equivalent but produces slightly more efficient code" or simply "equivalent". Or has anyone ever used a place expression (whose getter) has side effects? Relying on that would probably uncover one hundred and five bugs. So - to lead this to some end - is there someone not agreeing that we could just say "equivalent"? Micheal.