Re: [PATCH] Implement letrec without backquote?

[Tino Calancha <tino.calancha@gmail.com>]

On Sat, 5 Nov 2016, John Wiegley wrote:

>>>>>> Tino Calancha <tino.calancha@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> Just for my own education because i am not expert as you, let me ask you,
>> Why do you prefer the original one? Maybe is it more readable?
>
> That's a good question. I think it's because I've written far more macros
> using the former style than the latter, so it reads more naturally to me.
> The "list construction" style is also valid, but has always felt more
> awkward. That said, others might feel exactly the opposite.
I see.  Thank you for the explanation.  The backquote is very intuitive, i
think more suitable for humans.
My motivation to write that was after reading several old comments in
subr.el like 'do not use backquote here, it's too early'.

Also, i wanted to expand in just one setq call, that is, instead of
(setq x 1) (setq y 2) ... (setq foo N)
like this:
(setq x 1 y 2 ... foo N)

But, it seems it's doesn't bring a better efficiency.

> But in the absence of a definitive style guide, I'd say: stick with what
> we have already.
Fair enough.  It's important to keep code style consistency.

> Thanks for the taking the time to submit a patch!
Thanks to you for your answer!