From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Fixing numerous `message' bugs.. Date: Sat, 08 Dec 2007 14:15:02 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87myso8yrs.fsf@marie.gnufans.net> <87ve7b4xt6.fsf@marie.gnufans.net> <85abonpxnw.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <85fxyel8o8.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1197141323 28686 80.91.229.12 (8 Dec 2007 19:15:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 8 Dec 2007 19:15:23 +0000 (UTC) Cc: deego3@gmail.com, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: David Kastrup Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Dec 08 20:15:31 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 1J1597-0001cj-HO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 08 Dec 2007 20:15:29 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J158l-0007pZ-Mx for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 08 Dec 2007 14:15:07 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1J158h-0007pK-Vc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Dec 2007 14:15:04 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1J158g-0007p8-R8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Dec 2007 14:15:03 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J158g-0007p5-NJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Dec 2007 14:15:02 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1J158g-0005S0-J1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 08 Dec 2007 14:15:02 -0500 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1J158g-0005UC-78; Sat, 08 Dec 2007 14:15:02 -0500 In-reply-to: <85fxyel8o8.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> (message from David Kastrup on Fri, 07 Dec 2007 18:24:39 +0100) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:84885 Archived-At: I don't particularly like it. What about (message t nil 7), what is that supposed to return? nil too? The same as (message nil 7) returns now. (The value is nil.) I don't see that this is a problem. Anyway, there is little point to make this specific to message. So if at all, we would special-case format instead. I don't see why. There is no problem or issue with `format'. The issue arises with `message' because (message nil) is meaningful.