[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#56974: 29.0.50; Missing documentation for former subr-x macros
From: |
Michael Heerdegen |
Subject: |
bug#56974: 29.0.50; Missing documentation for former subr-x macros |
Date: |
Sat, 06 Aug 2022 03:45:05 +0200 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) |
Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org> writes:
> > +For the sake of backwards compatibility, it is possible to write a
> > +single binding without a binding list:
>
> I'm not sure we need to document this bit.
I don't think we should.
> > +@defmac if-let* (bindings@dots) then &rest else
> > +@code{if-let*} is mostly equivalent to @code{if-let}, with the
> > +exception that the legacy @code{(if (@var{var} (test)) foo bar)}
> > +syntax is not permitted.
> > +@end defmac
>
> So I think it's sufficient to document only the *-less variant.
Ehm - isn't the *-less form the old one we intended to obsolete (because
of it's backwards-compatibility hack), and the *-variant the one we
actually want to advertise?
Michael.
- bug#56974: 29.0.50; Missing documentation for former subr-x macros, Philip Kaludercic, 2022/08/04
- bug#56974: 29.0.50; Missing documentation for former subr-x macros, Eli Zaretskii, 2022/08/04
- bug#56974: 29.0.50; Missing documentation for former subr-x macros, Philip Kaludercic, 2022/08/05
- bug#56974: 29.0.50; Missing documentation for former subr-x macros, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2022/08/05
- bug#56974: 29.0.50; Missing documentation for former subr-x macros,
Michael Heerdegen <=
- bug#56974: 29.0.50; Missing documentation for former subr-x macros, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2022/08/06
- bug#56974: 29.0.50; Missing documentation for former subr-x macros, Michael Heerdegen, 2022/08/06
- bug#56974: 29.0.50; Missing documentation for former subr-x macros, Lars Ingebrigtsen, 2022/08/07
- bug#56974: 29.0.50; Missing documentation for former subr-x macros, Philip Kaludercic, 2022/08/09
- bug#56974: 29.0.50; Missing documentation for former subr-x macros, Po Lu, 2022/08/05