Hello, Achim Gratz <strom...@nexgo.de> writes:
> Am 22.03.2013 19:17, schrieb Nicolas Goaziou: >>> You might want to use the (function (lambda ...)) form. >> >> Why? (function (lambda ...)) is equivalent to (lambda ...). In fact, >> `lambda' uses `function' as a subroutine. > > http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/manual/html_node/elisp/Anonymous-Functions.html > > http://stackoverflow.com/questions/1852844/emacs-lisp-difference-between-function-lambda-and-lambda > > With Emacs 24.3 and eager macro expoansion the need to do this has > diminished, but for the benefit of older Emacsen we should probably > continue the practise. According to the link you pasted: The lambda form has one other effect: it tells the Emacs evaluator and byte-compiler that its argument is a function, by using function as a subroutine (see below). I don't think this is a recent addition (recent as in "since Emacs 24.1"). >> So, any objection (or further comment) for that change? > > Please go ahead. Done. Could you commit the other part of your patch? Regards, -- Nicolas Goaziou
