bug-gnu-emacs
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#4290: marked as done (23.1; (elisp)Anonymous Functions - unclear abo


From: Emacs bug Tracking System
Subject: bug#4290: marked as done (23.1; (elisp)Anonymous Functions - unclear about #')
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 2009 01:55:09 +0000

Your message dated Sat, 12 Sep 2009 21:49:48 -0400
with message-id <address@hidden>
and subject line Re: 23.1; (elisp)Anonymous Functions - unclear about #'
has caused the Emacs bug report #4290,
regarding 23.1; (elisp)Anonymous Functions - unclear about #'
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact address@hidden
immediately.)


-- 
4290: http://emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=4290
Emacs Bug Tracking System
Contact address@hidden with problems
--- Begin Message --- Subject: 23.1; (elisp)Anonymous Functions - unclear about #' Date: Sat, 29 Aug 2009 14:07:31 -0700
This Info node is unclear. It combines pre-Emacs 22 text that
explicitly says that lambda forms are *not* byte-compiled unless you
use `#'' or `function', with this statement that says that they are:
 
  Nowadays it is possible to omit `function' entirely, like this:
     (defun double-property (symbol prop)
       (change-property symbol prop (lambda (x) (* 2 x))))
  This is because `lambda' itself implies `function'.
 
What should be said is something like this:
 
"Starting with Emacs 22, a lambda form is byte-compiled when it is used
as a function, regardless of whether it is preceded by `function' or
`#''.  With Emacs versions prior to 22, you must explicitly use `#''
or `function' if you want the form to be byte-compiled."
 
This means rewording or replacing the paragraph that says that unless
you use `function' a lambda form won't be byte-compiled. The example
and its accompanying text need to be clarified.
 

In GNU Emacs 23.1.1 (i386-mingw-nt5.1.2600)
 of 2009-07-29 on SOFT-MJASON
Windowing system distributor `Microsoft Corp.', version 5.1.2600
configured using `configure --with-gcc (4.4)'
 




--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- Subject: Re: 23.1; (elisp)Anonymous Functions - unclear about #' Date: Sat, 12 Sep 2009 21:49:48 -0400
I have clarified the text.  Thanks for the bug report.

--- End Message ---

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]