[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: Add internal definitions to derived forms

From: Linus Björnstam
Subject: Re: Add internal definitions to derived forms
Date: Fri, 18 Nov 2022 10:04:30 +0100
User-agent: Cyrus-JMAP/3.7.0-alpha0-1115-g8b801eadce-fm-20221102.001-g8b801ead


Well, the point of the change is to make it so that things other than 
expressions are allowed. I change it to say @var{body}, and then later clarify 
that @var{test} is an arbitrary expression and @var{body} is a lambda-like 

Which when reading it now sounds... not very good. 

Would "is like the body of a lambda" be a better wording? That would imply that 
at least one expression is required. English is very much not my first 
language, and documentation changes are the ones that I fear the most...

best regards
  Linus Björnstam

On Thu, 17 Nov 2022, at 08:25, lloda wrote:
> Hi Linus,
> I don't understand the following change since at least one expression 
> is required in these clauses.
>  @lisp
>  (@var{test} => @var{expression})
> @@ -217,7 +217,7 @@ result of the @code{cond}-expression.
>  @var{key} may be any expression, and the @var{clause}s must have the form
>  @lisp
> -((@var{datum1} @dots{}) @var{expr1} @var{expr2} @dots{})
> +((@var{datum1} @dots{}) @var{body} @dots{})
>  @end lisp
> Regards
>   Daniel

reply via email to

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