Re: [External] : Re: Question about eval and compile-command

[Philip Kaludercic]

Andreas Schwab <schwab@linux-m68k.org> writes:

> On Aug 03 2023, Drew Adams wrote:
>
>>> > In retrospect, shouldn't the type be be a string or a function?
>>> 
>>> Not a function, but a form.
>>
>> A string is a form too...
>
> But a function does not evaluate to a string.

I'll rephrase my comment to avoid confusion: "Instead of any accepting a
string, or any form (both of which are evaluated, which is not an issue
due to the fact that evaluation of strings is idempotent), it seems like
it would have been better if the expected type of `compile-command' were
either a string, that would be interpreted without any further
processing, or a function, that would be funcalled with the expectation
that it would return a string, which would be taken to be the compile
command."