[Top][All Lists]

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

bug#23465: 25.0.93; `lambda' after hash-quote not highlighted as keyword

From: Dmitry Gutov
Subject: bug#23465: 25.0.93; `lambda' after hash-quote not highlighted as keyword
Date: Wed, 11 May 2016 13:18:13 +0300
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.1

On 05/11/2016 12:34 PM, Anders Lindgren wrote:

I thought they were the preferred way to write lambda:s. All examples in
the elisp reference guide use #' and there are almost 400 uses of them
in the Emacs source.

Since #'(lambda is fully equivalent to (lambda, we don't want to write the former anymore. The existing uses are probably holdouts from the time when the equivalence wasn't true yet.

I see only 4 hits on #'(lambda in our .texi files, and one of them (in functions.texi) says that the usages are equivalent and further elaborates on that. The others should be changed.

    As an aside, it would be great if we could get rid of the
    duplication between lisp--el-non-funcall-position-p vs
    elisp--form-quoted-p, elisp--expect-function-p and some bits inside
    elisp-completion-at-point. Or reduce it, at least.

Good points. However, shouldn't this be done in the master branch, not
in emacs-25?


When we're talking about enhancements. Currently, lisp special forms
(like "if" and "and") as well as elisp macros are highlighted using the
keyword face. Shouldn't it be better to use two different faces, or at
least give the user the option to configure this separately?

Let's not give the users a choice, it's not exactly a meaningful one.

We should rather have a standard which faces to use where that's kept consistent across major modes.

Alas, our choice is not easy here, since `font-lock-builtin-face' is currently used for keyword symbols.

> I would
> imagine that the real keywords would no longer stand out in lisp
> source using lots of macros. (Again, this is not for emacs-25.)

What's a keyword in Lisp? I'm not sure you can draw a definite line, especially since we could have a primitive defined in C in one version of Emacs, and moved to Lisp in the next version.

reply via email to

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