procyberian/emacs
1
0
Fork 0
Code Issues Pull requests Projects Releases Packages Wiki Activity Actions

* cl.texi (Obsolete Setf Customization): Updates for define-setf-method.

Browse source 
* etc/NEWS: Related markup.
This commit is contained in:
Glenn Morris 2012-11-07 17:23:34 -05:00
parent 4eeba55816
commit bdd8064f8e
3 changed files with 12 additions and 15 deletions
Show stats Download patch file Download diff file Expand all files Collapse all files

3
doc/misc/ChangeLog
View file

@ -2,7 +2,8 @@
* cl.texi (Obsolete Setf Customization):
Revert defsetf example to the more correct let rather than prog1.
Give define-modify-macro and defsetf gv.el replacements.
Give define-modify-macro, defsetf, and define-setf-method
gv.el replacements.
2012-11-06 Glenn Morris <rgm@gnu.org>

23
doc/misc/cl.texi
View file

@ -2865,7 +2865,6 @@ temporary variables.
This function creates a new, uninterned symbol (using @code{make-symbol})
with a unique name. (The name of an uninterned symbol is relevant
only if the symbol is printed.) By default, the name is generated
@c FIXME no longer true?
from an increasing sequence of numbers, @samp{G1000}, @samp{G1001},
@samp{G1002}, etc. If the optional argument @var{x} is a string, that
string is used as a prefix instead of @samp{G}. Uninterned symbols
@ -4479,14 +4478,6 @@ The @code{equal} predicate does not distinguish
between IEEE floating-point plus and minus zero. The @code{cl-equalp}
predicate has several differences with Common Lisp; @pxref{Predicates}.
@c FIXME consider moving to lispref
@ignore
The @code{setf} mechanism is entirely compatible, except that
setf-methods return a list of five values rather than five
values directly. Also, the new ``@code{setf} function'' concept
(typified by @code{(defun (setf foo) @dots{})}) is not implemented.
@end ignore
The @code{cl-do-all-symbols} form is the same as @code{cl-do-symbols}
with no @var{obarray} argument. In Common Lisp, this form would
iterate over all symbols in all packages. Since Emacs obarrays
@ -5059,11 +5050,12 @@ You could write this using @code{gv-define-setter} as:
@end defmac
@defmac define-setf-method access-fn arglist forms@dots{}
This is the most general way to create new place forms. When
a @code{setf} to @var{access-fn} with arguments described by
@var{arglist} is expanded, the @var{forms} are evaluated and
must return a list of five items:
@c FIXME Is this still true?
This is the most general way to create new place forms. You can
replace this by @code{gv-define-setter} or @code{gv-define-expander}.
When a @code{setf} to @var{access-fn} with arguments described by
@var{arglist} is expanded, the @var{forms} are evaluated and must
return a list of five items:
@enumerate
@item
@ -5092,6 +5084,9 @@ This is exactly like the Common Lisp macro of the same name,
except that the method returns a list of five values rather
than the five values themselves, since Emacs Lisp does not
support Common Lisp's notion of multiple return values.
(Note that the @code{setf} implementation provided by @file{gv.el}
does not use this five item format. Its use here is only for
backwards compatibility.)
Once again, the @var{forms} may begin with a documentation string.

1
etc/NEWS
View file

@ -335,6 +335,7 @@ of `symbol-function' in place forms.
A side effect is that vars without corresponding value are bound to nil
rather than making them unbound.
+++
*** The following methods of extending `setf' are obsolete
(use features from gv.el instead):
`define-modify-macro' (use `gv-letplace')