[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#40671: [DOC] modify literal objects
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
bug#40671: [DOC] modify literal objects |
Date: |
Fri, 17 Apr 2020 20:27:21 +0300 |
> From: Mattias Engdegård <mattiase@acm.org>
> Date: Fri, 17 Apr 2020 18:37:23 +0200
> Cc: Kevin Vigouroux <ke.vigouroux@laposte.net>
>
> > Can we modify literal objects?
>
> No, and the manual should do a much better job at explaining this. At the
> very least it should not promulgate bad ideas by including mutation of
> literals in example code. Patch attached, suggested for emacs-27.
I don't see any explanation of the issue in the patch, did I miss
something?
What I see summarily replaces literal lists and cons cells with a
calls to functions, and I'm not sure this is a step in the right
direction. It definitely complicates the examples, which is not
necessarily TRT, methodologically, for such introductory sections.
- bug#40671: [DOC] modify literal objects, Kevin Vigouroux, 2020/04/16
- bug#40671: [DOC] modify literal objects, Mattias Engdegård, 2020/04/17
- bug#40671: [DOC] modify literal objects, Paul Eggert, 2020/04/18
- bug#40671: [DOC] modify literal objects, Drew Adams, 2020/04/18
- bug#40671: [DOC] modify literal objects, Noam Postavsky, 2020/04/18
- bug#40671: [DOC] modify literal objects, Paul Eggert, 2020/04/19
- bug#40671: [DOC] modify literal objects, Drew Adams, 2020/04/19
- bug#40671: [DOC] modify literal objects, Paul Eggert, 2020/04/19
- bug#40671: [DOC] modify literal objects, Drew Adams, 2020/04/19
- bug#40671: [DOC] modify literal objects, Paul Eggert, 2020/04/19
- bug#40671: [DOC] modify literal objects, Drew Adams, 2020/04/20
- bug#40671: [DOC] modify literal objects, Paul Eggert, 2020/04/22