|
From: | Paul Eggert |
Subject: | bug#40671: [DOC] modify literal objects |
Date: | Sun, 19 Apr 2020 14:02:42 -0700 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.7.0 |
On 4/19/20 9:59 AM, Mattias EngdegÄrd wrote:
What about we add a separate section about literals of all types, why they should be treated as immutable even though mutation currently isn't detected or disallowed at runtime, and recommended ways of coping with it (constructor functions, copy-sequence)? It would serve as a point of reference for all sections describing destructive operations.
In my recent patches to the emacs-27 branch I added a section "Constants and Mutability" that discusses many of these issues. It's a fundamental topic so I put the new section into doc/lispref/objects.texi, and cross-referenced it from the destructive-operation sections.
I didn't think of recommending ways of coping with it, and that's a good suggestion. I'm not sure that the coping-mechanism discussion belongs in objects.texi, though, as it's pragmatic rather than fundamental.
There is also a need for some cautionary text in the backquote section.
Yes, my recent patches added a brief note there.
I'd volunteer to write it all but won't do the work just to have it shot down on general principles.
I know the feeling.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |