From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Miles Bader Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: return Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 18:54:39 +0900 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1290765303 10929 80.91.229.12 (26 Nov 2010 09:55:03 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2010 09:55:03 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Nov 26 10:54:59 2010 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 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PLv19-0005up-4p for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 26 Nov 2010 10:54:59 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:34566 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PLv18-0006Nu-PO for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 26 Nov 2010 04:54:58 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=33260 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1PLv13-0006Np-Qu for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Nov 2010 04:54:54 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PLv0z-0001XQ-5x for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Nov 2010 04:54:53 -0500 Original-Received: from tyo201.gate.nec.co.jp ([202.32.8.193]:65051) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1PLv0y-0001XC-Kn; Fri, 26 Nov 2010 04:54:49 -0500 Original-Received: from mailgate3.nec.co.jp ([10.7.69.193]) by tyo201.gate.nec.co.jp (8.13.8/8.13.4) with ESMTP id oAQ9skYL013231; Fri, 26 Nov 2010 18:54:46 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: (from root@localhost) by mailgate3.nec.co.jp (8.11.7/3.7W-MAILGATE-NEC) id oAQ9sj929134; Fri, 26 Nov 2010 18:54:45 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: from relay41.aps.necel.com ([10.29.19.9]) by vgate01.nec.co.jp (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id oAQ9sjKa014985; Fri, 26 Nov 2010 18:54:45 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: from relay51.aps.necel.com ([10.29.19.16] [10.29.19.16]) by relay41.aps.necel.com with ESMTP; Fri, 26 Nov 2010 18:54:40 +0900 Original-Received: from dhlpc061 ([10.114.98.109] [10.114.98.109]) by relay51.aps.necel.com with ESMTP; Fri, 26 Nov 2010 18:54:40 +0900 Original-Received: by dhlpc061 (Postfix, from userid 31295) id 1F69A52E21E; Fri, 26 Nov 2010 18:54:40 +0900 (JST) System-Type: x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu Blat: Foop In-Reply-To: (Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen's message of "Fri, 26 Nov 2010 10:36:51 +0100") Original-Lines: 18 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 8 (1) 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:133154 Archived-At: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen writes: > No, it establishes a named block, so you can say .. > Which is kinda annoying, in my opinion. Especially if you have long > function names and a lot of return-from forms. Or you rename function > names... Hmm, kinda annoying or not, I think it would be silly to add a slightly-incompatible form of return to elisp (regardless of whether it uses a new name or not); it's just confusing, for a very small gain. If we add this, I think we should just do so compatibly with CL, and then change cl.el to use the new mechanism. -Miles -- Accordion, n. An instrument in harmony with the sentiments of an assassin.