[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Indentation of def*
From: |
Stefan Kangas |
Subject: |
Re: Indentation of def* |
Date: |
Thu, 14 Oct 2021 06:25:50 -0700 |
Po Lu <luangruo@yahoo.com> writes:
> Then In this case, I would have to say "eek". There is simply too much
> code out there (mine included) that relies on the existing heuristic,
> and it would be very annoying to have that broken, at least now.
Can't you just use this?
(declare (indent defun))
And shouldn't you be using that in any case, to make your intention more
clear, and avoid relying on a fundamentally brittle heuristic?
- Re: Indentation of def*, (continued)
- Re: Indentation of def*, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2021/10/14
- Re: Indentation of def*, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2021/10/14
- Re: Indentation of def*, Po Lu, 2021/10/14
- Re: Indentation of def*, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2021/10/14
- Re: Indentation of def*, Po Lu, 2021/10/14
- Re: Indentation of def*, João Távora, 2021/10/14
- Re: Indentation of def*, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2021/10/14
- Re: Indentation of def*, João Távora, 2021/10/14
- Re: Indentation of def*, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2021/10/15
- Re: Indentation of def*, João Távora, 2021/10/15
- Re: Indentation of def*,
Stefan Kangas <=
- Re: Indentation of def*, Po Lu, 2021/10/14
- Re: Indentation of def*, Stefan Kangas, 2021/10/14
- Re: Indentation of def*, Po Lu, 2021/10/14
- Re: Indentation of def*, Stefan Kangas, 2021/10/14
- Re: Indentation of def*, Po Lu, 2021/10/15
- Re: Indentation of def*, Eli Zaretskii, 2021/10/15
- Re: Indentation of def*, Stefan Kangas, 2021/10/15
- Re: Indentation of def*, Eli Zaretskii, 2021/10/15
- Re: Indentation of def*, Stefan Kangas, 2021/10/15
- Re: Indentation of def*, Eli Zaretskii, 2021/10/15