From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [Emacs-diffs] /srv/bzr/emacs/trunk r104642: * src/process.c (Fset_process_buffer): Clarify return value in docstring. Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 13:53:24 -0400 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1308593443 19097 80.91.229.12 (20 Jun 2011 18:10:43 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 20 Jun 2011 18:10:43 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Deniz Dogan , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Juanma Barranquero Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jun 20 20:10:39 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QYivk-0001wc-TN for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 20 Jun 2011 20:10:37 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48920 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QYivj-0000Y9-DL for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 20 Jun 2011 14:10:35 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:59680) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QYifB-0003w6-7t for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Jun 2011 13:53:30 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QYif9-0002fZ-8S for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Jun 2011 13:53:29 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.181]:57643 helo=ironport2-out.pppoe.ca) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QYif8-0002fM-Um for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Jun 2011 13:53:27 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av0EAG2I/01FpYrD/2dsb2JhbABTpmF4iHO/WIYqBJlUhAWEIg X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.65,395,1304308800"; d="scan'208";a="116699460" Original-Received: from 69-165-138-195.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([69.165.138.195]) by ironport2-out.pppoe.ca with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 20 Jun 2011 13:53:24 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 7CD6359011; Mon, 20 Jun 2011 13:53:24 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Juanma Barranquero's message of "Mon, 20 Jun 2011 18:16:37 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 206.248.154.181 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:140730 Archived-At: >> Actually, I generally prefer not to document the accidental return value >> of side-effecting functions. > What's accidental in > return buffer; > ? That the author could just as well have written "return Qnil;" or various other options. I can't find a single example of Elisp code in Emacs that does not ignore the return value of set-process-buffer (and that's a good thing). Stefan