From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [Emacs-diffs] master 9dd95bf: * lisp/emacs-lisp/pcase.el (pcase--u1): Fix bignums Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2018 12:04:11 -0400 Message-ID: References: <83bm7hozav.fsf@gnu.org> <83zhv0oink.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1540571317 28495 195.159.176.226 (26 Oct 2018 16:28:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 26 Oct 2018 16:28:37 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Oct 26 18:28:33 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gG4yM-0007Gm-V7 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 18:28:31 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:32872 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gG50T-0002Gd-8Y for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 12:30:41 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56669) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gG4b9-0001k6-Pt for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 12:04:32 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gG4b2-00082E-8o for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 12:04:30 -0400 Original-Received: from [195.159.176.226] (port=43052 helo=blaine.gmane.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gG4b2-000811-0o for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 12:04:24 -0400 Original-Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gG4Yr-0000b9-Eg for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 26 Oct 2018 18:02:09 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 30 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:6yG4r/HygQiQ6lU7vdyK5aE11rw= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 195.159.176.226 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:230714 Archived-At: >> > Stefan, this change needs a suitable change in the docs (both the doc >> > string and the ELisp manual): they still claim integers are compared >> > using 'equal', which AFAIU is now inaccurate. >> AFAIK using `eql` gives the same result as comparing with `equal`: >> It's just an internal optimization that is transparent to the user. > That's so, but I find documentation that explicitly calls out 'equal' > misleading when the code actually invokes 'eql' instead. I don't understand why you feel that way. Would you feel the same if `pcase` always used `equal` and the optimization to `eql` were performed in the byte-compiler instead? > Maybe we should make the text less explicit then? I can't think of any way to make the text less explicit without making it either too vague or a lot more verbose. The semantics we want to promise to the user is exactly that of `equal`, so we'd have to say something like it'll behave like `equal` tho it might use something equivalent under the hood anyway which seems just more verbose with no clear benefit. To be clear, I'm not opposing such a change: it'd make the doc worse for me, but I'm ill-placed to judge what's best for the other readers. Stefan