[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#29165: 26.0.90; can't use some code byte-compiled under emacs 24
|
From: |
Ken Raeburn |
|
Subject: |
bug#29165: 26.0.90; can't use some code byte-compiled under emacs 24 |
|
Date: |
Fri, 15 Dec 2017 00:17:18 -0500 |
On Dec 14, 2017, at 22:04, Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
>> I don't see the use case for empty &aux, but I don't mind reverting that
>> change.
>
> It's typically when you define a function from within a macro so you may
> have something like
[…]
Why is this different from "… &optional ,@optargs” in a similar form, when
optargs could have no elements? Rejecting that was (part of) the point of
Noam’s change (and the previous change for bug 24913). I think I’ve already
made my objection to that part plain, but it seems like rejecting an empty
&optional and accepting an empty &aux would be inconsistent.
Ken