Re: Rationale behind conversion of a nil prefix arg to numeric 1

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Andreas Röhler <andreas.roehler@easy-emacs.de>
> Date: Sun, 4 Sep 2016 19:11:31 +0200
> 
> >> I am still wondering about the
> >> rationale of representing nil as the number one. Does this make sense,
> >> or is it useful, in some way?
> > Yes.  Most commands use the argument as a repeat count, so having it
> > default to one makes perfect sense.
> >
> 
> There a difference between "p" sending 1 and nil - which is the result 
> from non-interactive use.

"p" is documented as the _numeric_ value of the argument.  So it
obviously cannot yield nil.

> If a function needs a repeat count, it should provide some.

That'd mean changes in 90% of commands.  Quite silly, I'd say.

In any case, the OP asked what was the rationale, and I tried to
answer that.  Whether or not Emacs should have been designed
differently is another argument for another rainy day.