|
From: | Tino Calancha |
Subject: | bug#25129: 26.0.50; seq-some function |
Date: | Wed, 7 Dec 2016 19:31:41 +0900 (JST) |
User-agent: | Alpine 2.20 (DEB 67 2015-01-07) |
On Wed, 7 Dec 2016, Nicolas Petton wrote:
Tino Calancha <tino.calancha@gmail.com> writes:Nicolas Petton <nicolas@petton.fr> writes:Pierre Lorenzon <devel@pollock-nageoire.net> writes: Hi Pierre,I well understand now that I must use seq-find instead of seq-some but I think that I will not be the only one being confused by these functions specifications !There is a mistake (extra if) in the documentation, I will fix that. Other than that, is the following less confusing? Return non-nil if PRED returns non-nil for at least one element of SEQUENCE. If so, return the value returned by PRED.The previous doc string contains more information: it explicitely says that it returns the _first_ non-nil (PRED element).Indeed, what about: Return non-nil if PRED returns non-nil for at least one element of SEQUENCE. If so, return the first non-nil value returned by PRED.
Yeah better. The first line with the repetition of 'non-nil' sounds a little poetic. How about? Return non-nil if PRED is satisfied for at least one element of SEQUENCE. If so, return the first non-nil value returned by PRED.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |