Christian Ohler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > Stephen Leake, 2007-07-11: > >> So I think Christian added `#' in order to improve byte-compiling, > > No; I used #' instead of ' here because it makes a difference (and is > preferable) in Common Lisp. In Emacs Lisp, there is no difference; > the output of the byte-compiler is identical.
Ok, that confirms my understanding. > Since I use both languages and they are compatible to a large > extent, I tend to prefer idioms that work well in both. > > That said, I do think that #' is more readable in this case since it > signals that your intention is to pass a function, not just a > symbol. Ok. In my terms, that's "a style issue". But style issues are important. I think we have three choices here: 1) just ignore the issue, now that we understand it. Allow #' in DVC code, but neither encourage nor discourage it. 2) insist on proper Emacs Lisp style for DVC code. That means disapproving #'. 3) Establish a DVC Lisp style guide, and list this as one of the issues, with a mild preference for not using #'. I prefer option 3, but I'm ok with 1. I suspect RMS would argue for 2 :). If this were Ada, and the code was Mission Critical, I would argue for 2 as well. But DVC is not in that category. Hmm. Is there an Emacs Lisp style guide? We should try to follow it if we're trying to get DVC into Emacs. I know I'm not following the Emacs recommendation for doc strings, which requires two spaces after sentence-ending periods. Since Emacs' own fill functions don't provide that functionality, I simply refuse to do it manually! -- -- Stephe _______________________________________________ Dvc-dev mailing list [email protected] https://mail.gna.org/listinfo/dvc-dev
