Re: Advantage using mapc over dolist

[Heime]

On Wednesday, December 4th, 2024 at 8:04 AM, Tomas Hlavaty <tom@logand.com> 
wrote:

> On Tue 03 Dec 2024 at 22:24, Jean Louis bugs@gnu.support wrote:
> 
> > > > I am an Emacs Lisp programmer, and all Common Lisp functions
> > > > prefixed with `cl-` I find liberating in the sense that personally
> > > > within Emacs Lisp I do not like mixing it because it is not Common Lisp.
> 
> 
> Maybe the issue is that too many things were degraded into cl-*.
> And now very complex bad ideas are pushed as replacement fix.
> 
> > > > But within Emacs, I like using Emacs Lisp pure
> 
> 
> Not sure what does "Emacs Lisp pure" mean.
> Does it mean "Whatever comes with Emacs except cl-* stuff."?

The cl- prefix seems to indicate this.  The commands started to be explicit
that they are cl rather than elisp.  

For me, it should all be lisp.   
 
> "Emacs Lisp pure" had CASE and ECASE in 1993 (conversion to RCS
> according to git) until 2012 iirc.
> 
> > But Tomas, I mentioned nothing about pcase. I said cl- namespace being
> > separate feels liberating to me as my personal choice. If you wish to
> > use those commands without cl-prefix, there is solution that Stefan
> > wrote in recent email.
> 
> 
> Bad workarounds do not fill me with joy.
> 
> > > Anytime I process complex
> > > data recursively, I reach for labels. There does not seem to be an
> > > alternative, does it?
> > 
> > I have no idea about it, let me see what AI says:
> 
> 
> That AI is not good enough.
> The examples are too trivial to justify labels.
> 
> This function has a structure which does justify labels:
> 
> (defun parse-rss (dom)
> (let (z)
> (cl-labels ((link (x)
> (when (consp x)
> (cl-case (car x)
> (link (push (caddr x) z))
> (t (mapc #'link (cddr x))))))
> (rec (x)
> (when (consp x)
> (cl-case (car x)
> (item (link x))
> (t (mapc #'rec (cddr x)))))))
> (rec dom))
> (nreverse z)))
> 
> > So I would say, I would not get frustrated, rather just make an alias
> > for me and use `labels' wherever I wish and want.
> 
> 
> This does not address the problem.
> 
> In my Elisp code, I simply require cl-lib, add those cl- prefixes where
> needed and live with the result.
> 
> However, here simple and likely pre-CL functions and macros are degraded
> to cl-, people are discouraged from using cl- and encouraged to use
> something even more bonkers than cl-* ;-)