Re: (declare (type (function...

[Stefan Monnier]

>> The point is NOT to diverge from Common Lisp.  Such divergence is -
>> IMHO - unwarranted.

CL is a good inspiration in general, but ELisp is not and never will be
Common-Lisp, so it's not indispensable to adhere to its choices.
I think its provision of type annotation is not great, so there isn't
a strong need to follow it.

> I see your point and share the intent, given your provision 😃 for
>
> (defun foo (x y)
>    (declare (ftype (function (integer number) number)))
>    (+ x y))
>
> I'm personally okay with the change.

No objection here either.


        Stefan