[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#69533: 30.0.50; Wrong byte compilation of a certain apply syntax
From: |
Mattias Engdegård |
Subject: |
bug#69533: 30.0.50; Wrong byte compilation of a certain apply syntax |
Date: |
Mon, 4 Mar 2024 14:13:00 +0100 |
This was probably just a mistake of mine; a `<=` should have been `<`. Sorry
about that, I'll fix.
I think Stefan introduced the 1-arg `apply` semantics as a principled and
natural extension to the 2-or-more-arg case, but I'm less convinced. In any
case, it's there and documented.
However it is tempting to see the spotty implementation and bugs in many
versions as the converse of Hyrum's law that lets us remove the feature
instead...
- bug#69533: 30.0.50; Wrong byte compilation of a certain apply syntax, (continued)
- bug#69533: 30.0.50; Wrong byte compilation of a certain apply syntax, Michael Heerdegen, 2024/03/04
- bug#69533: 30.0.50; Wrong byte compilation of a certain apply syntax, Andreas Schwab, 2024/03/04
- bug#69533: 30.0.50; Wrong byte compilation of a certain apply syntax, Basil L. Contovounesios, 2024/03/04
- bug#69533: 30.0.50; Wrong byte compilation of a certain apply syntax,
Mattias Engdegård <=
- bug#69533: 30.0.50; Wrong byte compilation of a certain apply syntax, Mattias Engdegård, 2024/03/04
- bug#69533: 30.0.50; Wrong byte compilation of a certain apply syntax, Drew Adams, 2024/03/04
bug#69533: 30.0.50; Wrong byte compilation of a certain apply syntax, Eli Zaretskii, 2024/03/14