|
From: | Drew Adams |
Subject: | RE: Docs for &optional and &rest arguments together |
Date: | Thu, 31 Dec 2020 12:27:45 -0800 (PST) |
I'm not reflecting on who said anything. Just trying to help, as are others. Happy New Year to you, too. It is New Year Eve Drew. The best lady of all best ladies deserves attention, and I certainly have no need to read references to CL standards and historical mailings etc. Whatever CL does, who cares, they can do what they want and document what they want. I am pointing at a piece of Elisp documentation which can be better. But it's not lack of attention, if you actually reflect over what I said, instead of who said it, maybe you will see it too. Happy New Year, I wish you all best in next year! > I have glanced through though, maybe I am missing it. Don't just glance. Give it the attention that it and your understanding both deserve. If that CL doc didn't help you then I really suggest you sit down, take it slowly, and reread carefully. Both the Elisp doc and the CL doc about this are clear and complete, I think. I suggest with respect that you're maybe just not paying enough attention. Don't be in a hurry. The info is there; just give it a chance - and another read. The CL link is not documentation, it is an essay, entire novel :-). But interestingly, that do not touch on that case either . I have glanced through though, maybe I am missing it. > > I don't read it says both c and d are required |
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |