[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Using empty_string as the only "" string

From: Miles Bader
Subject: Re: Using empty_string as the only "" string
Date: Wed, 25 Apr 2007 08:37:47 +0900

"Juanma Barranquero" <address@hidden> writes:
> I don't think there's such thing as "lisp", but certainly I'm not
> misunderstanding what guarantees are made about Emacs Lisp. I'm
> talking about the "guarantee" implicit in its current behaviour.

Huh?  That's not a guarantee, and absolutely should not be taken as one.

There's a _reason_ why eq traditionally has wide latitude for
implementation-dependent/undefined behavior in many cases.

> For the umpteen time, I *know* (eq "" "") => t is not forbidden; just
> unexpected.

I disagree.  I don't think most people expect much one way or the other
in this case, _especially_ because we're talking about lexical constants
(for instance, I expect very few people would be surprised if the
compiler merged various lexical constants).

[The exception of course would be rank beginners, who often --
incorrectly -- _expect_ exactly this behavior.]

> Could we please stop Lisp 101?

(rolls eyes)

Come now, if we were really planning to harm you, would we be waiting here,
 beside the path, in the very darkest part of the forest?

reply via email to

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