bug#13052: 24.3.50; mention recent change of `kbd' to a function in NEWS

[Juanma Barranquero]

On Sun, Dec 2, 2012 at 5:07 AM, Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com> wrote:

> The application of property `pure' to `kbd' is not in byte-opt.el.  It is in
> subr.el.  And in my code it would, likewise, be in an ordinary Lisp library.

I wouldn't call subr.el "an ordinary Lisp library"; perhaps it's the
word "basic" in "basic lisp subroutines for Emacs".

> I was just asking whether you know of something that makes this special to 
> Emacs
> Dev and not appropriate for user libraries.  If you don't know of anything,
> fine; perhaps someone else does.

No, I don't know of something that makes it special to Emacs, other
than the interiorities of the byte-optimizer are undocumented except
in the source code. It's almost by definition what I would call
"internal".

I suppose we will have to agree to disagree on this, because I don't
share your impulse to document every nook and cranny of Emacs.

> It is a question: whether `pure' is information that users can reasonably use 
> to
> inform the byte compiler that a function is what the compiler would expect of 
> a
> pure function, i.e., what the code you pointed me to would expect, in order to
> be able to perform that particular optimization.

If it were so, it would be documented, don't you think. In the section
of the Elisp manual dedicated to the byte-optimizer. Only that section
does not exist.

   J