[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#28254: 26.0.50; SRFI-2 and-let*
From: |
Michael Heerdegen |
Subject: |
bug#28254: 26.0.50; SRFI-2 and-let* |
Date: |
Sat, 02 Sep 2017 07:25:07 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
Mark Oteiza <mvoteiza@udel.edu> writes:
> >> I didn't try writing it in the style of if-let*--perhaps if-let* could
> >> be extended and all three macros would learn (EXPR).
> >
> >Yes, I think it's best if all foo-let* macros interpret the varlist in
> >the same way.
>
> Alright, I'll look at it.
Isn't there a problem with EXPR being a symbol S, which already has a
different meaning (bind S to nil)? Though, this seems barely useful to
me. Anyway, introducing (EXPR) would thus be backward incompatible.
Michael.
- bug#28254: 26.0.50; SRFI-2 and-let*, Mark Oteiza, 2017/09/01
- bug#28254: 26.0.50; SRFI-2 and-let*, npostavs, 2017/09/01
- bug#28254: 26.0.50; SRFI-2 and-let*, Mark Oteiza, 2017/09/02
- bug#28254: 26.0.50; SRFI-2 and-let*,
Michael Heerdegen <=
- bug#28254: 26.0.50; SRFI-2 and-let*, Mark Oteiza, 2017/09/02
- bug#28254: 26.0.50; SRFI-2 and-let*, Noam Postavsky, 2017/09/02
- bug#28254: 26.0.50; SRFI-2 and-let*, Michael Heerdegen, 2017/09/03
- bug#28254: 26.0.50; SRFI-2 and-let*, Mark Oteiza, 2017/09/03
- bug#28254: 26.0.50; SRFI-2 and-let*, Mark Oteiza, 2017/09/03
- bug#28254: 26.0.50; SRFI-2 and-let*, Michael Heerdegen, 2017/09/04
- bug#28254: 26.0.50; SRFI-2 and-let*, Mark Oteiza, 2017/09/04
- bug#28254: 26.0.50; SRFI-2 and-let*, Michael Heerdegen, 2017/09/05
- bug#28254: 26.0.50; SRFI-2 and-let*, Michael Heerdegen, 2017/09/06
- bug#28254: 26.0.50; SRFI-2 and-let*, Mark Oteiza, 2017/09/06