[elpa] master 213751f: [gnugo int] Revert bogus OoE avoidance fix, w/ better comment.

[Thien-Thi Nguyen]

branch: master
commit 213751fcd05a7b688c41870237731b3bcf67dc9e
Author: Thien-Thi Nguyen <address@hidden>
Commit: Thien-Thi Nguyen <address@hidden>

    [gnugo int] Revert bogus OoE avoidance fix, w/ better comment.
    
    Looks like 2017-01-31, "Avoid latent order-of-evaluation error"
    is just so much mollycoddling.  Elegance wins after all.  :-D
    
    * packages/gnugo/packages/gnugo/gnugo.el (gnugo--decorate): Revert to use
    ‘cons’ w/ sibling ‘pop’ calls as args.  Reported by Stefan Monnier,
    <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2017-01/msg00779.html>.
---
 packages/gnugo/gnugo.el |   15 ++++++---------
 1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)

diff --git a/packages/gnugo/gnugo.el b/packages/gnugo/gnugo.el
index ada6fd9..0c84732 100644
--- a/packages/gnugo/gnugo.el
+++ b/packages/gnugo/gnugo.el
@@ -898,15 +898,12 @@ For all other values of RSEL, do nothing and return nil."
    while plist
    do (setf
        fruit (list
-              ;; Albeit elegant, this assumes LtR OoE, unfortunately.
-              ;;- (cons
-              ;;   (pop plist)
-              ;;   (pop plist))
-              ;; Instead, we use ‘let*’ for explicit sequencing.
-              ;; Let the Scheme-based Emacs hacking proceed apace!
-              (let* ((k (pop plist))
-                     (v (pop plist)))
-                (cons k v)))
+              ;; No OoE worries, here.  "The first step in evaluating a
+              ;; function call is to evaluate the remaining elements of the
+              ;; list from left to right."  (info "(elisp) Function Forms")
+              (cons
+               (pop plist)
+               (pop plist)))
        (cdr tp) fruit
        tp       fruit)))