Stephen Leake <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:

> So I think Christian added `#' in order to improve byte-compiling, but
> I don't think it means anything in this case, since the function is a
> symbol, not a list.

That's my feeling too.

Note also that people sometimes write

  #'(lambda (...) ...)

But in elisp, that's strictly equivalent to

  (lambda (...) ...)

since `lambda' is a macro that does simply

(defmacro lambda (&rest cdr)
  (list 'function (cons 'lambda cdr)))

In general, I'd say the # is useless in emacs-lisp, but there might be
counter-examples.

-- 
Matthieu

_______________________________________________
Dvc-dev mailing list
[email protected]
https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/dvc-dev

Reply via email to