On Mon, 30 Jan 2017, Jordon Biondo wrote: > A while ago I brought up the inconstant signatures of `setq`, `setq-default` and `setq-local`. In short, I want `setq-local` to > have the same signature as `setq` and `setq-local`. (setq* VAR VAL VAR VAL...) > See thread: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2015-03/msg00448.html > > I appreciate Stefan's input back then, but I'd like to revisit the issue, get further input, and see if I can change some minds > about the issue. > > If you believe the variadic signature of `setq` and `setq-default` is not ideal, consider that backwards compatibility erases any > chance that those two functions will lose that feature, and consider the benefits of being consistently wrong over being > inconsistently right. > > Are maintainers and users still opposed to this change? If not I'd be happy to update the patch from the previous thread. Richard Stallman writes: > It is most natural for setq-local to have the same calling convention > as setq. +1 FWIW, i am in favour of naturalness too. Regards, Tino