Re: if-let/if-let*/and-let/..

[Michael Heerdegen]

Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:

> And it probably did make sense when the foo-let* were introduced.
> It's just in retrospect that it doesn't.

No, AFAIR it never made sense.  The switch to new names, and declaring
the old names obsolete, was done to avoid making a backward incompatible
change.

> > If you don't object to unite the two APIs in master, I'm ok with that
> > decision.  However, I then would like to change the NEWS entry in the
> > release branch so that it doesn't mention the new foo-let* names,
> > because these will be only synonyms for foo-let in subsequent releases,
> > and letting NEWS introduce them now as something different would only
> > cause confusion.
>
> Fine with me, thanks.

Oh, I see that we still have a little problem with that: In emacs-26, we
currently only have `and-let*', no `and-let' is defined - so what we
present in NEWS would still be inconsistent/confusing - unless we also
keep `and-let*' secret for now and only tell users that `if-let' and
`when-let' have gotten extended semantics.  That would not be
problematic however, since and-let/and-let* is only a special case of
when-let, the main improvement was the extension of the semantics of the
variable binding list.


Michael.