From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier via "Emacs development discussions." Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [External] : Re: cond* vs pcase Date: Mon, 12 Feb 2024 16:39:45 -0500 Message-ID: References: <822c332c-1a85-4454-8978-0b1491981058@alphapapa.net> <874jek5r0o.fsf@yahoo.com> Reply-To: Stefan Monnier Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="8916"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:lUKTZTs3+p3znfNBRrZFdm2KtXI= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 12 22:40:36 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1rZe2V-00027z-KF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 12 Feb 2024 22:40:35 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rZe1r-0003he-AP; Mon, 12 Feb 2024 16:39:55 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rZe1p-0003hW-PY for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Feb 2024 16:39:53 -0500 Original-Received: from ciao.gmane.io ([116.202.254.214]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rZe1n-0003AV-Rm for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Feb 2024 16:39:53 -0500 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1rZe1l-00013m-Rw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Feb 2024 22:39:49 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Received-SPF: pass client-ip=116.202.254.214; envelope-from=ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; helo=ciao.gmane.io X-Spam_score_int: -16 X-Spam_score: -1.7 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.7 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:316153 Archived-At: >>>> (pcase foo >>>> ('bar (do-some-bar-stuff)) >>>> ('baz (do-some-baz-fluff))) >>>> >>>> is not more awful or wonderful than: >>>> >>>> (cl-case foo >>>> (bar (do-some-bar-stuff)) >>>> (baz (do-some-baz-fluff))) > > Sorry to interject, but this really suggests that `cl-case' should > become, simply, `case', in subr.el this time around... No, on the contrary. It just suggests that for this specific kind of situations, either works about as well, so this is a use-case that would not justify adding `pcase` if we already have `cl-case` (or `case`) and it similarly would not justify adding `cl-case` (or `case`) if we already have `pcase`. Stefan "who would have preferred to extend `(cl-)case` rather than introduce a new name, if it weren't for the fact that the `(cl-)case` syntax does not lend itself to such extensions"