On 7/15/05, Stefan Monnier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> That seems to be the only real motivation (the others are more like "why not
> have it"?).
Well, I won't say that. It's more: "why not use them for the same uses
that they have in other languages". And moreover, having defconst's
which don't "const" is cognitive dissonance.
> E.g. my local Emacs's strings are
> non-mutable. I.e. I like to try and add some constraint which seems to be
> generally not broken, and see if/where it gets broken. This is a general
> technique to learn to understand some unknown piece of code.
Interesting.
> Of course I also strongly believe in non-mutable objects, so I like the idea
> of constants and non-mutable strings, but I know it's a waste of time to try
> and include those things in elisp.
Yeah, I know now, too.
Thanks,
/L/e/k/t/u
_______________________________________________
Emacs-devel mailing list
Emacs-devel@gnu.org
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel
