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: Change of Lisp syntax for "fancy" quotes in Emacs 27? Date: Sat, 06 Oct 2018 10:34:56 -0400 Message-ID: References: <83y3bc2378.fsf@gnu.org> <73c02cbb-888f-478c-a231-923aa43c093e@default> <20181006091422.GA4855@ACM> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1538836436 28251 195.159.176.226 (6 Oct 2018 14:33:56 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 6 Oct 2018 14:33:56 +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 Sat Oct 06 16:33:52 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 1g8neS-0007GI-Ep for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2018 16:33:52 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39413 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g8ngZ-0002rg-4Y for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2018 10:36:03 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45892) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g8nfh-0002o4-QK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2018 10:35:10 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g8nfe-0002sl-JV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2018 10:35:09 -0400 Original-Received: from [195.159.176.226] (port=40587 helo=blaine.gmane.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g8nfe-0002qi-Ci for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2018 10:35:06 -0400 Original-Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1g8ndU-00061w-HX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Oct 2018 16:32:52 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 11 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:d7ZxSiUD2aEtUqzevtAfPCartw0= 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:230255 Archived-At: > We made (setq foo) invalid some while ago. Why not similarly make (let > ((foo))...) invalid? I assume you mean that the byte-compiler should signal a warning? If so, I'm fully in favor. Signaling an actual error would be problematic at this stage, because it'd break too much code. Stefan