Re: Why is FUNC in cl-callf not allowed to be an expression?

[Michael Heerdegen]

Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> writes:

> > (defmacro gv-callf (call &optional n)
> >   (gv-letplace (_getter setter) (nth (or n 1) call)
> >     (funcall setter call)))
>
> It's cute, tho I'm not too fond of specifying the place via a number,
> personally,

[I should use GETTER btw for more efficient code:

(defmacro gv-callf (call &optional n)
  (unless n (setq n 1))
  (gv-letplace (getter setter) (nth n call)
    (setf (nth n call) getter)
    (funcall setter call)))
]

Yes, but still better than having it as part of the macro name as in
cl-callf2... I don't have any better idea currently.  We could still
extend cl-callf however.


Michael.