From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Emanuel Berg Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: How to quote a list of functions? Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2015 02:34:35 +0200 Message-ID: <87lhdada78.fsf@nl106-137-147.student.uu.se> References: <871tfdjqjx.fsf@mbork.pl> <877fp5b52v.fsf@nl106-137-147.student.uu.se> <8737zs7uq3.fsf@mbork.pl> <87zj1vddkz.fsf@kuiper.lan.informatimago.com> <87mvxug2us.fsf@nl106-137-147.student.uu.se> <87vbch1gb0.fsf@nl106-137-147.student.uu.se> <87wpwudby7.fsf@nl106-137-147.student.uu.se> <87zj1qbwxs.fsf@kuiper.lan.informatimago.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1439771820 14491 80.91.229.3 (17 Aug 2015 00:37:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2015 00:37:00 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Aug 17 02:36:45 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZR8Ps-0003M4-Pd for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 17 Aug 2015 02:36:44 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53793 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZR8Pr-0006ZJ-Rb for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 16 Aug 2015 20:36:43 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37426) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZR8Pi-0006Yg-BC for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Aug 2015 20:36:35 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZR8Pe-0007wl-Fd for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Aug 2015 20:36:34 -0400 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:59287) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZR8Pe-0007vv-8p for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Aug 2015 20:36:30 -0400 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZR8Pa-00033L-Co for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Aug 2015 02:36:26 +0200 Original-Received: from nl106-137-246.student.uu.se ([130.243.137.246]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 17 Aug 2015 02:36:26 +0200 Original-Received: from embe8573 by nl106-137-246.student.uu.se with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 17 Aug 2015 02:36:26 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-Lines: 34 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: nl106-137-246.student.uu.se Mail-Copies-To: never User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.4 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:h2fVW3CmI68E0KRZ4o0EvEqnZO8= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 80.91.229.3 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:106634 Archived-At: "Pascal J. Bourguignon" writes: > It's quite simple. > > When you want a function given a name, you use > (function NAME) or #'NAME which reads equally. > > When you want a symbol, you use (quote SYMBOL) or > 'SYMBOL which reads equally. > > Accidentally, on the current GNU emacs lisp > implementation, (function X) and (quote X) return > the same thing, the symbol X, Why is the distinction important to uphold (on the level of the programmer)? Even more so, as sometimes (when?) functions should not be denoted functions but symbols - as the example with `put' had it. > so if you make a mistake ... and if you make the > opposite mistake ... If I use `quote' in both cases, and it works, I don't see that as a mistake in either case, actually I see that as much *less* error-prone than each time considering if the sharp quote should be used. It is much better I let the computer sort that out. -- underground experts united http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573