[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#59328: 29.0.50; `seq-keep' implementation only valid for lists
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
bug#59328: 29.0.50; `seq-keep' implementation only valid for lists |
Date: |
Fri, 25 Nov 2022 13:55:34 +0200 |
> From: Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen@web.de>
> Cc: 59328@debbugs.gnu.org, larsi@gnus.org, jonas@bernoul.li
> Date: Fri, 25 Nov 2022 10:47:31 +0100
>
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>
> > Can tests for this be written in a way that they are only run if the
> > relevant packages are available on the user's system? If so, I'd
> > prefer to have that than no tests at all.
>
> I don't know.
AFAIK, 'require' can return nil if asked not to error out.
> Alternatively we could implement `seq-map' for an ad-hoc defined
> sequence type and test using that type, e.g. this expression:
>
> #+begin_src emacs-lisp
> (progn
> (defvar gensym)
> (let ((gensym (make-symbol "foo")))
> (eval `(cl-defmethod seq-map (function (thing (head ,gensym)))
> (append (list (car thing) (cadr thing)) (seq-map function (cddr
> thing))))
> t)
> (equal (list gensym nil 4 46)
> (seq-keep (lambda (x) (and (integerp x) (* 2 x)))
> (list gensym nil 2 'x gensym 23)))))
> #+end_src
>
> returns t with my patch installed and nil else and works without relying
> on something external. I'm not sure if defining methods (for seq-map in
> this case) that are globally visible is allowed in tests, so I
> implemented the example above in a way that the change of the generic
> function is not visible from the outside (thus the "secret" gensym).
>
> Would something like that be acceptable?
>
> Sorry for my ignorance, I didn't write much tests before.
Sounds like over-engineering to me.
Like I said: it's your call. If you see too many complications to adding a
test, and my suggestions don't convince you, I won't object to installing
your original proposal without a test.
Thanks.
- bug#59328: 29.0.50; `seq-keep' implementation only valid for lists, (continued)
- bug#59328: 29.0.50; `seq-keep' implementation only valid for lists, Michael Heerdegen, 2022/11/24
- bug#59328: 29.0.50; `seq-keep' implementation only valid for lists, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/11/24
- bug#59328: 29.0.50; `seq-keep' implementation only valid for lists, Michael Heerdegen, 2022/11/24
- bug#59328: 29.0.50; `seq-keep' implementation only valid for lists, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/11/24
- bug#59328: 29.0.50; `seq-keep' implementation only valid for lists, Michael Heerdegen, 2022/11/24
- bug#59328: 29.0.50; `seq-keep' implementation only valid for lists, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/11/24
- bug#59328: 29.0.50; `seq-keep' implementation only valid for lists, Michael Heerdegen, 2022/11/24
- bug#59328: 29.0.50; `seq-keep' implementation only valid for lists, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/11/24
- bug#59328: 29.0.50; `seq-keep' implementation only valid for lists, Michael Heerdegen, 2022/11/25
- bug#59328: 29.0.50; `seq-keep' implementation only valid for lists, Stefan Kangas, 2022/11/25
- bug#59328: 29.0.50; `seq-keep' implementation only valid for lists,
Eli Zaretskii <=