Re: Constructed docstrings for closures

[Stefan Monnier]

Lars suggests:
> (declare (comment (format "This is a comment about %s" bla)))
> would be a natural syntax, I think?

David prefers:
> Doing it the other way round seems much cleaner:
> (with-doc-string
>   (concat "Toto is very " blabla ".")
>   (lambda (foo bar)
>     (code using foo and bar (and blabla as well))))

There are various issues around this:
1- the code that constructs the docstring should be visible to the compiler
   (so the compiler can tell it where to find the value of the lexically
   scoped `blabla' variable).
2- it shouldn't slow down normal evaluation
3- it should be implementable without too much effort.

>From that point of view I guess David's approach is promising on
the first two points, but I'm not sure what the 3rd point would
look like.

Lars's suggestion seems problematic w.r.t point #2 since `lambda' would
now have to check for a `declare'.

I considered using a special property on the docstring as well, but
that's problematic w.r.t point #1.

So please keep sending ideas.


        Stefan