From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Pascal J. Bourguignon" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: random predicate function Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 18:28:33 +0100 Organization: Informatimago Message-ID: <87y67rx7we.fsf@kuiper.lan.informatimago.com> References: <87mxo9r8xg.fsf@kuiper.lan.informatimago.com> <87r5dlmw4a.fsf@lifelogs.com> <8762uxr2cc.fsf@kuiper.lan.informatimago.com> <8739pz144d.fsf@lifelogs.com> <8739pzysey.fsf@kuiper.lan.informatimago.com> <87bp4nx9y8.fsf@lifelogs.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1292435051 21261 80.91.229.12 (15 Dec 2010 17:44:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 15 Dec 2010 17:44:11 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 15 18:44:06 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PSvOW-0004kI-38 for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 15 Dec 2010 18:44:06 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:53366 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PSvOH-0007E6-5n for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 15 Dec 2010 12:43:49 -0500 Original-Path: usenet.stanford.edu!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail Original-Newsgroups: gnu.emacs.help Original-Lines: 33 Original-X-Trace: individual.net eaTrWxY2Or7+mc4bHnDKNwcm/0fqfGR3uI8FZc0KIvI97i9flD Cancel-Lock: sha1:NGY3N2FlOWY4ZDBhM2Y4YTg0MjZhNTExMzZkOTIyZjRhNzNmMDdkOQ== sha1:cMVeGEDMKGtH7bxAXTVmVUEO0iI= Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwAQMAAABtzGvEAAAABlBMVEUAAAD///+l2Z/dAAAA oElEQVR4nK3OsRHCMAwF0O8YQufUNIQRGIAja9CxSA55AxZgFO4coMgYrEDDQZWPIlNAjwq9 033pbOBPtbXuB6PKNBn5gZkhGa86Z4x2wE67O+06WxGD/HCOGR0deY3f9Ijwwt7rNGNf6Oac l/GuZTF1wFGKiYYHKSFAkjIo1b6sCYS1sVmFhhhahKQssRjRT90ITWUk6vvK3RsPGs+M1RuR mV+hO/VvFAAAAABJRU5ErkJggg== X-Accept-Language: fr, es, en X-Disabled: X-No-Archive: no User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) Original-Xref: usenet.stanford.edu gnu.emacs.help:183318 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:77562 Archived-At: Ted Zlatanov writes: > On Wed, 15 Dec 2010 16:20:05 +0100 "Pascal J. Bourguignon" wrote: > > PJB> Ted Zlatanov writes: >>> I agree the CL macros are nicer, but the non-macro version is much >>> easier to debug *in GNU Emacs* and it's already installed. So they both >>> have benefits. > > PJB> I don't see how code without macros is easier to debug, there are so > PJB> many macros in lisp code. > > We're talking about GNU Emacs specifically. Have you debugged macros > there? They are definitely not as intuitive as functions in the debugger. Only if you don't understand that lisp macros are exactly the same as lisp functions. For any macro (defmacro m (args...) body...) you can write a function (defun m* (args...) body...) and replace the macro by (defmacro m (args...) (m* args...)) Such a macro is trivial to debug: it just calls a single function! Therefore macros are as easy as functions to debug. So, no, I'm sorry, but I never observed any difference between debugging of macros or functions. -- __Pascal Bourguignon__ http://www.informatimago.com/ A bad day in () is better than a good day in {}.