From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dave Goel Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Fixing numerous `message' bugs.. Date: Fri, 07 Dec 2007 13:00:50 -0500 Message-ID: <87hciugzal.fsf@marie.gnufans.net> References: <87myso8yrs.fsf@marie.gnufans.net> <87ve7b4xt6.fsf@marie.gnufans.net> <85abonpxnw.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <85fxyel8o8.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1197050506 18631 80.91.229.12 (7 Dec 2007 18:01:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 7 Dec 2007 18:01:46 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, deego3@gmail.com, rms@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca To: David Kastrup Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Dec 07 19:01:55 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1J0hW6-0001DS-Qm for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 07 Dec 2007 19:01:39 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J0hVp-0000IV-Vf for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 07 Dec 2007 13:01:22 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1J0hVk-0000GQ-I3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Dec 2007 13:01:16 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1J0hVg-000079-Lw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Dec 2007 13:01:15 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J0hVg-00006q-IL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Dec 2007 13:01:12 -0500 Original-Received: from mtao03.charter.net ([209.225.8.188]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1J0hVZ-0001EN-Mz; Fri, 07 Dec 2007 13:01:05 -0500 Original-Received: from aarprv06.charter.net ([10.20.200.76]) by mtao03.charter.net (InterMail vM.7.08.02.00 201-2186-121-20061213) with ESMTP id <20071207180055.GHOM19023.mtao03.charter.net@aarprv06.charter.net>; Fri, 7 Dec 2007 13:00:55 -0500 Original-Received: from marie.gnufans.net ([66.168.196.121]) by aarprv06.charter.net with ESMTP id <20071207180055.KKBF14098.aarprv06.charter.net@marie.gnufans.net>; Fri, 7 Dec 2007 13:00:55 -0500 Original-Received: from deego by marie.gnufans.net with local (Exim 3.36 #1 (Debian)) id 1J0hVK-0007fx-00; Fri, 07 Dec 2007 13:00:50 -0500 X-Face: #5@=vrmx5t3mZaPY8(mR.n+V#:%4NW7j5A&^}@lGp2rK; CQ4%iH1v'gh/^A)w5*6c&R2(P' 4+seYDq8OK'LPI/C(C^A*w|f*t+8, 'T8b#_0~h3!A7GoVroE[cr0Fb'A0%SdU|Lk@gBV&1vA In-Reply-To: <85fxyel8o8.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> (David Kastrup's message of "Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:24:39 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110006 (No Gnus v0.6) Emacs/21.4 (gnu/linux) X-Chzlrs: 0 X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:84841 Archived-At: > >> Here's an idea: make up an argument to `message' that says treat the >> next argument literally. How about t? >> >> (message t STRING) is equivalent to (message "%s" STRING) >> (message t nil) is equivalent to (message nil) >> >> So in the cases that are buggy it suffices to add t as the first argument. The above is the neatest idea so far. It does not involve a new function, and makes fixing code really easy. And, any author that desires a literal treatment can simply use (message t string). > I don't particularly like it. What about (message t nil 7), what is > that supposed to return? nil too? Sure, why not? ((Or, it could return an error. )) > Anyway, there is little point to make this specific to message. So > if at all, we would special-case format instead. Which means that > (stringp (format ...)) is no longer guaranteed to be true. Can you elaborate? Why should a `message' bug cause changes to something as general as format? And, how will that fix the problem at hand? Besides, tweaking `format' will further our non-compatibility with Common Lisp.