| Summary: | app-emacs/jde-2.4.1_pre20110622: (lambda (url) ...) quoted with ' rather than with #' | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| Product: | Gentoo Linux | Reporter: | Martin von Gagern <Martin.vGagern> |
| Component: | [OLD] Development | Assignee: | Emacs project <emacs> |
| Status: | RESOLVED TEST-REQUEST | ||
| Severity: | normal | CC: | flow, java |
| Priority: | Normal | ||
| Version: | unspecified | ||
| Hardware: | All | ||
| OS: | Linux | ||
| URL: | http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.jdee.user/623 | ||
| Whiteboard: | |||
| Package list: | Runtime testing required: | --- | |
|
Description
Martin von Gagern
2012-07-30 09:13:19 UTC
The different quotes are just shortcuts for the lisp reader: 'foo expands to (quote foo) #'foo expands to (function foo) Generally, functions or lambda expressions should be quoted with the latter and non-functions with the former. However, using the "wrong" quote results only in a performance penalty for byte-compiled code, but will still work fine. (Furthermore, lambda is self-quoting, so the quote could also be omitted altogether in all of your exampled.) I think that it would be best if this was fixed upstream. Could you report it please? (In reply to comment #1) > Could you report it please? Submitted upstream to jdee-users mailing list: http://tinyurl.com/d7h763s Thanks. Fixed commited upstream on 2012-08-14: http://jdee.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/jdee?view=revision&revision=257 There also was a later fix along the same lines: http://jdee.svn.sourceforge.net/viewvc/jdee?view=revision&revision=270 Could we get a new preview from current svn? 20110622 appears pretty old by now. Trunk has seen some activity, but nothing radical from what I can tell, so rolling a new prerelease tarball which includes the above would be nice. (In reply to comment #4) > Could we get a new preview from current svn? 20110622 appears pretty old by > now. Trunk has seen some activity, but nothing radical from what I can tell, > so rolling a new prerelease tarball which includes the above would be nice. "Pretty old" and "some activity, but nothing radical" (indeed, there are only 15 commits since our last snapshot) is a contradiction. ;-) But sure, I can make a new snapshot. Bumped to version 2.4.1. Please test if there are any regressions (and report back). If not, then this will be the next candidate for stable. |