On Thu, Jan 23 2014, Mark Walters <[email protected]> wrote: >> What do you think about this alternate version? it allows >> notmuch-test-progn to have the same syntax as progn. It seems about >> the same level of complexity to me; fwiw I prefer the let over the >> dolist/setq. > > This looks much nicer: a macro is definitely the right way to do this. > > I might be inclined to replace the let... by a prog1 but would be happy > either way on that.
prog1! definitely ! :D > > Best wishes > > Mark > Tomi >> +(defmacro notmuch-test-progn (&rest body) >> + (cons 'progn >> + (mapcar >> + (lambda (x) `(let ((ret ,x)) >> + (notmuch-post-command) >> + ret)) >> + body))) _______________________________________________ notmuch mailing list [email protected] http://notmuchmail.org/mailman/listinfo/notmuch
