Re: Replace trivial pcase occurrences in the Emacs sources

[Clément Pit-Claudel]

On 01/11/2018 10.44, Andy Moreton wrote:
> The difference is that the non-pcase constructs can document exactly
> which types are acceptable as arguments. For the pcase macros, the
> acceptable argument types are not fixed by the pcase macro, but depend
> on the patterns used. That is harder to explain clearly, and harder for
> the user to reason about correctness of the code that they write.

Thanks, I see what you mean (though it soujnds more like a general indictment 
of pcase, not just of the "fail silently" behavior of pcase-*). Conversely, 
though, you could argue that documenting exactly which data are acceptable is 
precisely what the patterns passed to pcase-let do: if I write `(pcase-let* 
((`(,a . ,b) xyz)) …)`, I'm specifying that `xyz' should be a cons.