From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Christopher Dimech Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Declaring Lisp function types Date: Tue, 26 Mar 2024 11:28:06 +0100 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="1599"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, Eli Zaretskii , Stefan Kangas , Adam Porter , Stefan Monnier , Arthur Miller To: Andrea Corallo Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 26 11:29:11 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 1rp43K-0000Cd-Vy for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 26 Mar 2024 11:29:11 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rp42d-0006Oc-ND; Tue, 26 Mar 2024 06:28:27 -0400 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 1rp42b-0006OH-Fp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 26 Mar 2024 06:28:25 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.18]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rp42Z-0005IH-Hl; Tue, 26 Mar 2024 06:28:25 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmx.com; s=s31663417; t=1711448886; x=1712053686; i=dimech@gmx.com; bh=xbbRZcwciwVejqcDdeU2sJKimUC0mdk7JVOSedH/qpw=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To: References; b=lL5XT1VqDsEVAumeON9YcDmkOWGktqiWIA9EODt3m6/kTBSiZUy4PpgJqFQ2WQzX dAuGsLKI3hPtGIlEeDEFxG97k1ggow5J1+nPIzgzmNiicYr9RKLjiTGW6HJSPEuyZ +5iCtMvY7mKTXXJ8tQFfnKXMQzutFLNo3TOvHU/aP4e9hlpGlWTl3hicFcjroOJLA Vd2vI/ZKJxosFwtFGVgWbdEw628W/4Zyq1kBGA/+cwcuEfSt07N/9zKgHt8AA3B8N XW+1Lmt4yZBTEufBl8vpzkkYtiOLdpoQ6fM19ZzLJBGhryFG+HY0y6y7Jx8lLH0Zo C7Hv8HVQRQTw2tg/NQ== X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a Original-Received: from [141.8.81.247] ([141.8.81.247]) by web-mail.gmx.net (3c-app-mailcom-bs15.server.lan [172.19.170.183]) (via HTTP); Tue, 26 Mar 2024 11:28:06 +0100 Importance: normal Sensitivity: Normal In-Reply-To: X-UI-Message-Type: mail X-Priority: 3 X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:nKR8nbiHMwTIWO2o91FLUzyin/80Yu/8Pv/lE31yzGPUbJd9bT2sXS1fsXCP6r1kydSbR gwPJHTsu+8qc8bvPEoiQ+aDbcciE+XQtDfd5GMYRHWGax83eVPceXsAW78jo/npzj0sXwYxmrDcA 2e4Jx/qxviFPSEPPhMvL0TdXOy3EeCulBawko4GhqnveVLxWpQ8gytFZurqUmujnjHQRFi+O2HDl UeQyHm743XRRIsCMKREtn0PD3BaxppFwTq/90+lEyMCBDm70ScEmTknE/gzGZMOxlEl+bjhAwD9u wY= UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:pQCqxoj1e3I=;KG+VHdNTO1dQNPkMIpYM2cwDEct xL7yf50HRnEM7E6vfmw9DAI+FI5GFY4SkXBdcvTmnH0GNLTv+auMHt+du1XApfN/e7f+62RR8 b0ZT9BQRoRhNgoG2lMS6j2kiD4oyL5nK3qOzN8reT1EpZ6rFCNWDnpJBq+bnSM7iz2Oo+1KCh nPaoc4rgOJkg2FYZqT/vexW+TQ9DoTRjrnj+QIHenZSvGPn36Il+8rVRM8OA3h4V8/JNpEZSX QwEZ/LQ6zzfYnynlILiF9UncdrQu1CCiO7m7Bt8UizAHTtGMBBQ5yUmvqIVCGP8rnsJgtuSf7 4hDQFXGORPRNkofvoLjGT6FzveyLlTpQik08j8JKZur/lnyTEzyYeo6IaXv4IeMLgeCL14Isy ze+MB5L93KYVsRLShRrlQ+r2xhXbQxD++Pe6Cj4QGfNxNYpsVCYOzQ2vYdlRSdFbjtf1HTzd0 t/wNEAXJeGL3jsfPJF7oEothc+GmUo1wzMWxEXnei2mu7+KTspNbjFI/zrpTdxQbi/oU7J0OQ NfL8thcZTeNicLEKfEnvgiPwrjQKyB2QRPUBnEikQjCUTrvorBO4FKZ+OAIn6FOAOXY3GUWzt 2NkIdQJtakNl9X91GnsBZDr6IZrWfGgKZsD3DzSzcHuMwmdZdyxNBnciv2yYIpGuBBnX9VQN6 w9o7d+hKSCR3f1k3XRXvGcBmixiR1wI29DAXulGqjmLNQ8o6NqmCz592aK2pTd4= Received-SPF: pass client-ip=212.227.15.18; envelope-from=dimech@gmx.com; helo=mout.gmx.net X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham 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:317297 Archived-At: > Sent: Tuesday, March 26, 2024 at 10:13 PM > From: "Andrea Corallo" > To: emacs-devel@gnu.org > Cc: "Eli Zaretskii" , "Stefan Kangas" , "Adam Porter" , "Stefan Monnier" , "Arthur Miller" > Subject: Re: Declaring Lisp function types > > Andrea Corallo writes: > > > I'd like to progress on this but in order to do that we should pick a > > syntax. > > > > Of the three most discussed syntaxes in this thread my order of > > preference is (by examples): > > > > 1: > > > > (defun sum (a b) > > (declare (function (integer integer) integer)) > > (+ a b)) > > > > 2: > > > > (defun sum (a b) > > (declare (type (function (integer integer) integer))) > > (+ a b)) > > > > 3: > > > > (defun sum (a b) > > (declare (type (integer integer) integer)) > > (+ a b)) > > > > For the reasons I've already expressed: 1 I like it, 2 I'm okay with i= t, > > 3 I very much dislike it. > > > > Maintainers WDYT? > > > > Thanks > > > > Andrea > > To make a summary of my understanding of this conversation on the > various options so far: > > A couple of people mentioned would be a good idea to consider CL's > syntax but this is problematic for how our declare machinery works. > > I think Eli and I preferred solution 1. I approve of preferred solution 1 > Stefan suggested we go for 2 as it's more verbose (and this should > discourage users at using it too much). Do not like increase of verbosity or intentions towards discouraging functionalities that are inherently acceptable to use. If some things should not be done, there should be no tools for them, especially not emanating from an official release, as I am more for robustness as the ultimate completion step. > Adam strongly opposed to 1 as it conflicts with his proposal [1] but > AFAIU he agreed later on that thread on another solution so I guess the > conflict should not be there anymore. > > If I've miss-summarized any opinion indeed please feel free to rectify. > > I think we should make a decision (maintainers) so we can progress on > this. > > Thanks > > Andrea > > [1] > >