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.devel Subject: Re: cond* vs pcase Date: Tue, 06 Feb 2024 18:57:43 +0000 Message-ID: <87o7cts9nc.fsf@posteo.net> References: <87il32iwmm.fsf@posteo.net> <87o7cttu4l.fsf@posteo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="8371"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: arthur.miller@live.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Alfred M. Szmidt" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 06 19:58:32 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1rXQeN-0001xH-IR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 06 Feb 2024 19:58:31 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rXQdh-00055r-06; Tue, 06 Feb 2024 13:57:49 -0500 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 1rXQdf-00055U-Ly for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 06 Feb 2024 13:57:47 -0500 Original-Received: from mout02.posteo.de ([185.67.36.66]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rXQde-0007Ms-4V for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 06 Feb 2024 13:57:47 -0500 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6423F240101 for ; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 19:57:44 +0100 (CET) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1707245864; bh=UTSpoUiM/BkgKLzNklAVoembmA4d2rfCWokFHPZ7spI=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Autocrypt:OpenPGP:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version: Content-Type:From; b=sHOOcBkkh81Ab/E0apUILBNqaqECV6xMP96XC/4TczKfXvl3eA38skbRrPg2JwONl wkS83WoTAIZXuNTnIZbSgz+S1aPzr2HPbGZfhkCqEcWuJXG7A+Ynk4DZsACWgkKvzU Ft/rPqXAQXQTX+6mJed6QgwYwO4TBw3Vqthueg/CLpwN0xt/XtAkEU3hmtxhPeX8FZ NM61lQoG9Gsf16ahLyqekUTr4248uWEwnCFjn60fVlwPfFwIqnZ2+66SR16xeHFqIu ei90MfEF8Y81XfrSdV23gOEwoYgawUlybXZ8fJdzIC/rrnpgX6ufaCas0drGZtSS9c hmpZxI3YhOqmQ== Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4TTsvC5QtHz6txf; Tue, 6 Feb 2024 19:57:43 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: (Alfred M. Szmidt's message of "Tue, 06 Feb 2024 12:27:33 -0500") 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=7126E1DE2F0CE35C770BED01F2C3CC513DB89F66; url="https://keys.openpgp.org/vks/v1/by-fingerprint/7126E1DE2F0CE35C770BED01F2C3CC513DB89F66"; preference=signencrypt Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.67.36.66; envelope-from=philipk@posteo.net; helo=mout02.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_H4=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=unavailable autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:315942 Archived-At: "Alfred M. Szmidt" writes: > > Because your not doing pattern matching, you're comparing against a > > set of strings/symbols/numbers/.... > > Simply because pattern matching is a more powerful generalisation, > capable of expressing case-distinction; in the end it compiles down to > almost the same code anyway. > > Are you suggesting that COND/CASE/... and other "trivial" matching > constructs should be replaced with PCASE/COND*? No, just that using pcase in these cases isn't wrong. Drew Adams writes: >> Simply because [1] pattern matching is a more >> powerful generalisation, capable of expressing >> case-distinction; [2] in the end it compiles >> down to almost the same code anyway. > > Wow. Really _not_ a good reason (IMHO). > Neither of those reasons [1,2] is good. > > With that reasoning you'll use `pcase' > _always and everywhere_ - never `if', > `cond', `let', `or', `and',... Please don't be dishonest; My question was why cl-case was more appropriate than pcase, where both are macros that boil down to simpler primitives. I don't see an inherent advantage to using the more specific abstraction over the more generic one. I like pcase, and prefer using it in my code, but if you've got some code that is already using a lot of cl-lib and no pcase, then there is no point in transiting cl-case forms into pcase. > > Hey, `pcase' can do it all! And it > compiles down to almost the same thing! > > "Demain on rase gratis !"