bug#41353: closed ('thunk?' documentation is misleading)

[GNU bug Tracking System]

Your message dated Wed, 27 May 2020 22:50:04 +0200
with message-id <87sgflhzlv.fsf@gnu.org>
and subject line Re: bug#41353: (thunk? (const 1))
has caused the debbugs.gnu.org bug report #41353,
regarding 'thunk?' documentation is misleading
to be marked as done.

(If you believe you have received this mail in error, please contact
help-debbugs@gnu.org.)


-- 
41353: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=41353
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs@gnu.org with problems
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> (const x) is a thunk
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Sun, 17 May 2020 12:41:05 +0200
>
>
>
>
> With guile-3.0.2:
>
> scheme@(guile-user)> (thunk? (const 1))
> $1 = #t
>
> Since thunk is a procedure that does not accept arguments (section
> 6.9.7, documentation for 'thunk?'), the result of the above evaluation
> should be #f.
>
>
>
>
> --- End Message ---
> --- Begin Message ---
>
>
>
> Subject: 
>
> Re: bug#41353: (thunk? (const 1))
>
>
>
>
> Date: 
>
> Wed, 27 May 2020 22:50:04 +0200
>
>
>
>
> User-agent: 
>
> Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux)
>
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> skribis:
>
> > I think this is more a matter of the documentation being not quite right:
> >
> >  -- Scheme Procedure: thunk? obj
> >  -- C Function: scm_thunk_p (obj)
> >      Return ‘#t’ if OBJ is a thunk—a procedure that does not accept
> >      arguments.
> >
> > "if OBJ can serve as a thunk—a procedure called without arguments."
>
> Agreed.  Fixed in 9c03e44dcfc118c37d28bb948f4d255c7b755d96.
>
> Thanks,
> Ludo’.
>
>
> --- End Message ---