GNU logs - #23926, boring messages

Message sent to bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:

Subject: bug#23926: defcustom with STANDARD=<non-pure-expression> gives confusing results
Resent-From: Noam Postavsky <npostavs@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 03:12:01 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.23926.B.146803387612396 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
To: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
From: Noam Postavsky <npostavs@HIDDEN>
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 23:11:02 -0400
Message-ID: <CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Precedence: list
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>

A trivial example:

(defcustom time (current-time-string)
  "the time"
  :type 'string)

Then try to M-x customize-options RET time RET, it will show with
state "CHANGED outside Customize." Similarly, doing <f1> v time RET
shows the "original value" as the current time, not the actual value
when `time' was defined.

See also http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=4755#25

Message sent:

Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.505 (Entity 5.505)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
From: help-debbugs@HIDDEN (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: Noam Postavsky <npostavs@HIDDEN>
Subject: bug#23926: Acknowledgement (defcustom with STANDARD=<non-pure-expression>
 gives confusing results)
Message-ID: <handler.23926.B.146803387612396.ack <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
References: <CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>
X-Gnu-PR-Message: ack 23926
X-Gnu-PR-Package: emacs
Reply-To: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 03:12:02 +0000

Thank you for filing a new bug report with debbugs.gnu.org.

This is an automatically generated reply to let you know your message
has been received.

Your message is being forwarded to the package maintainers and other
interested parties for their attention; they will reply in due course.

Your message has been sent to the package maintainer(s):
 bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN

If you wish to submit further information on this problem, please
send it to 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org.

Please do not send mail to help-debbugs@HIDDEN unless you wish
to report a problem with the Bug-tracking system.

--=20
23926: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=3D23926
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs@HIDDEN with problems

Message sent to bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:

Subject: bug#23926: defcustom with STANDARD=<non-pure-expression> gives confusing results
Resent-From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 06:32:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.23926.B23926.146804589010985 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
To: Noam Postavsky <npostavs@HIDDEN>, 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <0331acec-645d-4362-8e9a-a18433b518df@default>
Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 23:31:17 -0700 (PDT)
From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
References: <CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>
In-Reply-To: <CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Precedence: list
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>

Calling such an expression "non-pure" can be misleading.

The concept you are looking for is apparently just non-constant,
IOW, an expression whose value is not always the same.

IOW the expression is not referentially transparent.

But in Lisp non-pure often refers to or suggests side effects,
esp. mutation of structure.  That's not required for this bug
to manifest.  All that's needed is for the expression to not
necessarily return the same value each time it is evaluated.=20

Anyway, yes, I agree that filing another bug for this
(separate from #4755) is good.

Message sent to bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:

Subject: bug#23926: defcustom with STANDARD=<non-pure-expression> gives confusing results
Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 07:14:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.23926.B23926.146804839614658 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
To: Noam Postavsky <npostavs@HIDDEN>
Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 10:13:00 +0300
Message-Id: <83vb0fgu83.fsf@HIDDEN>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
In-reply-to: <CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>
 (message from Noam Postavsky on Fri, 8 Jul 2016 23:11:02 -0400)
References: <CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>
Precedence: list
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>

> From: Noam Postavsky <npostavs@HIDDEN>
> Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 23:11:02 -0400
> 
> A trivial example:
> 
> (defcustom time (current-time-string)
>   "the time"
>   :type 'string)
> 
> Then try to M-x customize-options RET time RET, it will show with
> state "CHANGED outside Customize." Similarly, doing <f1> v time RET
> shows the "original value" as the current time, not the actual value
> when `time' was defined.

Why is this a bug?  Seems to be expected behavior to me.

Message sent to bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#23926: defcustom with STANDARD=<non-pure-expression> gives confusing results
Resent-From: npostavs@HIDDEN
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 11:56:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.23926.B23926.146806530821748 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 23926
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Received: via spool by 23926-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B23926.146806530821748
          (code B ref 23926); Sat, 09 Jul 2016 11:56:02 +0000
Received: (at 23926) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jul 2016 11:55:08 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43289 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1bLqqi-0005ed-9Z
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 07:55:08 -0400
Received: from mail-it0-f54.google.com ([209.85.214.54]:35020)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <npostavs@HIDDEN>)
 id 1bLqqg-0005dz-8E; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 07:55:06 -0400
Received: by mail-it0-f54.google.com with SMTP id u186so28358672ita.0;
 Sat, 09 Jul 2016 04:55:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id
 :user-agent:mime-version;
 bh=4XgNw1PEdy/Q9sdN6HE9iV4vjUZdWfkzc1P2jN0YO2Q=;
 b=bJbKGKV1nr67TVLUaiqeHNHirLbHdnriq7WniXV/CHHx55cH34x3L9W/IIQ1XNyZA6
 +c/hDA9ehKP6iV45f7dejcq788DOqVyO7pjAgOr9lXBvMe0I/KK+sSZv73Yjm5iqTxJG
 tBbIfLUaNr9LdIW9Es5XDDSCkStj596VNEhcUZobzm0roMDjz0EnwOgrcQZw6sIMpywp
 9eEgs+lHrZpqXR4fp/B7G2gXqcdorhrPKcO7aBi3sRp5JHZvCsz+SV4REzYjT9yqYSdC
 YDwb7vDYNqYGlFsI+2R6eM+P104dNmhc7SIDM//T3+PXNHovZWVjsGHRltg5VNYbINkn
 1dsA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
 h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date
 :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version;
 bh=4XgNw1PEdy/Q9sdN6HE9iV4vjUZdWfkzc1P2jN0YO2Q=;
 b=lIfdsBPRBhktqi7uPwkRbcHRX5U9qrvznbDkmvhyFnTOuXtsNS9AOnVdfQfho9qzy/
 j4RQl44m4quLDiJ6qRsR962wg9NM9pKsYiQEM1BGujojVqzK6jYR9O0MXmPHY28xIE4j
 ML4Crl9l3unoiMgRFrBMzfxXIaH+/zCgLXV59QzkqPd6X62g8c6TkxoM2/RWQKpoe7cs
 Agf9pcvCh7rmVK/jbvy+HGFsQsizOzme4+zZ0G1J15zfSEb2lgbNOsP3r1jBt2S0K8Uy
 V9APrbWl1WKdfV9BEdUI228ZJUClBCuByYgL7ZDkTaetlPrT0Fu5JsKAV9BdgrBgHuzd
 PDzw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tK4aCWMqUU+KL6bLjPRVQCa3zxkMvADz0aUo3wkhuVcWTUeGNk+UF4UOL0bd+0vjw==
X-Received: by 10.36.248.6 with SMTP id a6mr7075001ith.25.1468065300394;
 Sat, 09 Jul 2016 04:55:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zony (206-188-64-44.cpe.distributel.net. [206.188.64.44])
 by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id o15sm2702421ith.2.2016.07.09.04.54.59
 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
 Sat, 09 Jul 2016 04:54:59 -0700 (PDT)
From: npostavs@HIDDEN
References: <CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>
 <83vb0fgu83.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 07:54:58 -0400
In-Reply-To: <83vb0fgu83.fsf@HIDDEN> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 09 Jul
 2016 10:13:00 +0300")
Message-ID: <87k2gvhvql.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.93 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)

retitle 23926 defcustom with STANDARD=<non-constant-expression> gives confusing results
quit

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN> writes:

>> From: Noam Postavsky <npostavs@HIDDEN>
>> Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 23:11:02 -0400
>> 
>> A trivial example:
>> 
>> (defcustom time (current-time-string)
>>   "the time"
>>   :type 'string)
>> 
>> Then try to M-x customize-options RET time RET, it will show with
>> state "CHANGED outside Customize." Similarly, doing <f1> v time RET
>> shows the "original value" as the current time, not the actual value
>> when `time' was defined.
>
> Why is this a bug?  Seems to be expected behavior to me.

Yeah, it seems expected because you're familiar with the code.  But it
causes Emacs to claim the "original" value is different from what it
originally was, which seems nonsensical.

I wonder why Emacs saves only the original expression and not the
actual original value?

Message received at control <at> debbugs.gnu.org:

Received: (at control) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jul 2016 11:55:08 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sat Jul 09 07:55:08 2016
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43287 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1bLqqi-0005ea-3Q
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 07:55:08 -0400
Received: from mail-it0-f54.google.com ([209.85.214.54]:35020)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <npostavs@HIDDEN>)
 id 1bLqqg-0005dz-8E; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 07:55:06 -0400
Received: by mail-it0-f54.google.com with SMTP id u186so28358672ita.0;
 Sat, 09 Jul 2016 04:55:06 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id
 :user-agent:mime-version;
 bh=4XgNw1PEdy/Q9sdN6HE9iV4vjUZdWfkzc1P2jN0YO2Q=;
 b=bJbKGKV1nr67TVLUaiqeHNHirLbHdnriq7WniXV/CHHx55cH34x3L9W/IIQ1XNyZA6
 +c/hDA9ehKP6iV45f7dejcq788DOqVyO7pjAgOr9lXBvMe0I/KK+sSZv73Yjm5iqTxJG
 tBbIfLUaNr9LdIW9Es5XDDSCkStj596VNEhcUZobzm0roMDjz0EnwOgrcQZw6sIMpywp
 9eEgs+lHrZpqXR4fp/B7G2gXqcdorhrPKcO7aBi3sRp5JHZvCsz+SV4REzYjT9yqYSdC
 YDwb7vDYNqYGlFsI+2R6eM+P104dNmhc7SIDM//T3+PXNHovZWVjsGHRltg5VNYbINkn
 1dsA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
 h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date
 :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version;
 bh=4XgNw1PEdy/Q9sdN6HE9iV4vjUZdWfkzc1P2jN0YO2Q=;
 b=lIfdsBPRBhktqi7uPwkRbcHRX5U9qrvznbDkmvhyFnTOuXtsNS9AOnVdfQfho9qzy/
 j4RQl44m4quLDiJ6qRsR962wg9NM9pKsYiQEM1BGujojVqzK6jYR9O0MXmPHY28xIE4j
 ML4Crl9l3unoiMgRFrBMzfxXIaH+/zCgLXV59QzkqPd6X62g8c6TkxoM2/RWQKpoe7cs
 Agf9pcvCh7rmVK/jbvy+HGFsQsizOzme4+zZ0G1J15zfSEb2lgbNOsP3r1jBt2S0K8Uy
 V9APrbWl1WKdfV9BEdUI228ZJUClBCuByYgL7ZDkTaetlPrT0Fu5JsKAV9BdgrBgHuzd
 PDzw==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tK4aCWMqUU+KL6bLjPRVQCa3zxkMvADz0aUo3wkhuVcWTUeGNk+UF4UOL0bd+0vjw==
X-Received: by 10.36.248.6 with SMTP id a6mr7075001ith.25.1468065300394;
 Sat, 09 Jul 2016 04:55:00 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zony (206-188-64-44.cpe.distributel.net. [206.188.64.44])
 by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id o15sm2702421ith.2.2016.07.09.04.54.59
 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
 Sat, 09 Jul 2016 04:54:59 -0700 (PDT)
From: npostavs@HIDDEN
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#23926: defcustom with STANDARD=<non-pure-expression> gives
 confusing results
References: <CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>
 <83vb0fgu83.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 07:54:58 -0400
In-Reply-To: <83vb0fgu83.fsf@HIDDEN> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 09 Jul
 2016 10:13:00 +0300")
Message-ID: <87k2gvhvql.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.93 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: control
Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)

retitle 23926 defcustom with STANDARD=<non-constant-expression> gives confusing results
quit

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN> writes:

>> From: Noam Postavsky <npostavs@HIDDEN>
>> Date: Fri, 8 Jul 2016 23:11:02 -0400
>> 
>> A trivial example:
>> 
>> (defcustom time (current-time-string)
>>   "the time"
>>   :type 'string)
>> 
>> Then try to M-x customize-options RET time RET, it will show with
>> state "CHANGED outside Customize." Similarly, doing <f1> v time RET
>> shows the "original value" as the current time, not the actual value
>> when `time' was defined.
>
> Why is this a bug?  Seems to be expected behavior to me.

Yeah, it seems expected because you're familiar with the code.  But it
causes Emacs to claim the "original" value is different from what it
originally was, which seems nonsensical.

I wonder why Emacs saves only the original expression and not the
actual original value?

Message sent to bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#23926: defcustom with STANDARD=<non-pure-expression> gives confusing results
Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 12:32:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.23926.B23926.146806752032058 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 23926
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: npostavs@HIDDEN
Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Received: via spool by 23926-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B23926.146806752032058
          (code B ref 23926); Sat, 09 Jul 2016 12:32:02 +0000
Received: (at 23926) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jul 2016 12:32:00 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43311 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1bLrQO-0008Kz-Cg
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 08:32:00 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:39767)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1bLrQN-0008Kn-GS
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 08:31:59 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1bLrQF-0000hD-Bf
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 08:31:54 -0400
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,RP_MATCHES_RCVD
 autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:39281)
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>)
 id 1bLrQF-0000gz-9U; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 08:31:51 -0400
Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1660
 helo=home-c4e4a596f7)
 by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128)
 (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>)
 id 1bLrQD-0006QS-5y; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 08:31:49 -0400
Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 15:31:42 +0300
Message-Id: <838txbgfgx.fsf@HIDDEN>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
In-reply-to: <87k2gvhvql.fsf@HIDDEN>
 (npostavs@HIDDEN)
References: <CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>
 <83vb0fgu83.fsf@HIDDEN> <87k2gvhvql.fsf@HIDDEN>
X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic]
X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e
X-Spam-Score: -6.3 (------)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -6.3 (------)

> From: npostavs@HIDDEN
> Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 07:54:58 -0400
> 
> Yeah, it seems expected because you're familiar with the code.  But it
> causes Emacs to claim the "original" value is different from what it
> originally was, which seems nonsensical.

It's not nonsensical, it's what actually happens, AFAIK.

> I wonder why Emacs saves only the original expression and not the
> actual original value?

It does, but then it reevaluates at startup.

Message sent to bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#23926: defcustom with STANDARD=<non-pure-expression> gives confusing results
Resent-From: Noam Postavsky <npostavs@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 12:56:01 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.23926.B23926.14680689571718 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 23926
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Received: via spool by 23926-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B23926.14680689571718
          (code B ref 23926); Sat, 09 Jul 2016 12:56:01 +0000
Received: (at 23926) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jul 2016 12:55:57 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43320 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1bLrnY-0000Re-QH
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 08:55:56 -0400
Received: from mail-oi0-f48.google.com ([209.85.218.48]:34069)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <npostavs@HIDDEN>) id 1bLrnW-0000RP-KY
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 08:55:54 -0400
Received: by mail-oi0-f48.google.com with SMTP id s66so93302852oif.1
 for <23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 05:55:54 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id
 :subject:to:cc;
 bh=g7HdK46q7+d+Od+WhkdxOmiQipIBUrqMseEFJRWPjKE=;
 b=j6BOLecOl0gwo91CyeoBAAq6hfREjkN/9aE2HvNAgJJHtJ1AWEIjjAvdcgjOk4b54+
 6i0h9HhKNmcKiXVFZ+w2kicQXC6+RjwKu2WuzJNjKeFHwSwcuXc2VRGeNBRmHx0ZWk45
 1gLYSzJ0qZNw9bKXvgGROTnO3fD+AffQVUfkMxrmunBcIMyVhcHZmIE8ksewrE4sZlhk
 BIx6tl3zqbh2M6OSxGp59tqK4hepf60D/j+fq1pXyVhYJwqfYiBbLofiAK08hFT3EbKf
 HX/FwZ+c7/3cMB4z5gXT/VCPYLcjRBjaYljIQue5TaYkZ6xvs8kWJqW33TA4+T19DcEy
 6rRA==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from
 :date:message-id:subject:to:cc;
 bh=g7HdK46q7+d+Od+WhkdxOmiQipIBUrqMseEFJRWPjKE=;
 b=ZWt9uXCfiX6UNPSQyOLPbVYArvNhT8M3l5gJIeJ9/Te72OvrWopmpW4ZrRpugX2VML
 +Ps68Q8q0vMegmTWwdgmC+hqch2lTAr9J4qzHYXXKwvZ9TDcke3aBvk7IRAXUqcGT62m
 MzpQWac97QKHHoUGozorLZfFfhk6A55pQpP/feT6RDTJm4dvaO0QfcjPLbtVpvgycXpH
 l0EUdXekyVxS84ycMKwlHaWKMXumMvqU4JtR0An8lu8RQY07EsQZ8y6FeUEtkk/hEQrZ
 /iPQ5fPkwPGrEN6ENAJ2YcHk6G7zLEKuI+8qq4TtXRCP0AMKw8BF3h1rNhtq830FmGZn
 tUcA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tL/PkM0aArNxrKwoeOJBxZzZMLU6s0EqxapiTNpSUl8jFzWmntxwILXXyCvZxoSO0N/xRpACO53vECpZA==
X-Received: by 10.202.102.75 with SMTP id a72mr1194789oic.40.1468068948920;
 Sat, 09 Jul 2016 05:55:48 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.157.4.197 with HTTP; Sat, 9 Jul 2016 05:55:48 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <838txbgfgx.fsf@HIDDEN>
References: <CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>
 <83vb0fgu83.fsf@HIDDEN> <87k2gvhvql.fsf@HIDDEN>
 <838txbgfgx.fsf@HIDDEN>
From: Noam Postavsky <npostavs@HIDDEN>
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2016 08:55:48 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 4ToVXoUNU6ETnUQWNNb6qXYU4vM
Message-ID: <CAM-tV-80t+zDrp3OPhW36YtQCqWDWCZjc3TQdoj9Aka2TiJEfQ@HIDDEN>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)

On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 8:31 AM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN> wrote:
>> From: npostavs@HIDDEN
>> Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
>> Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 07:54:58 -0400
>>
>> Yeah, it seems expected because you're familiar with the code.  But it
>> causes Emacs to claim the "original" value is different from what it
>> originally was, which seems nonsensical.
>
> It's not nonsensical, it's what actually happens, AFAIK.

What actually happens is that Emacs goes back in time to change what
the original value was? Perhaps the dates in etc/future-bug are wrong
then ;)

>
>> I wonder why Emacs saves only the original expression and not the
>> actual original value?
>
> It does, but then it reevaluates at startup.

It seems it's also reevaluated every time the variable is looked at
with customize, or describe-variable.

Message sent to bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#23926: defcustom with STANDARD=<non-pure-expression> gives confusing results
Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 13:15:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.23926.B23926.14680700863484 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 23926
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: Noam Postavsky <npostavs@HIDDEN>
Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Received: via spool by 23926-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B23926.14680700863484
          (code B ref 23926); Sat, 09 Jul 2016 13:15:02 +0000
Received: (at 23926) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jul 2016 13:14:46 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43343 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1bLs5m-0000u7-CU
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 09:14:46 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:49369)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1bLs5k-0000tt-No
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 09:14:44 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1bLs5c-0000r0-5B
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 09:14:39 -0400
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,RP_MATCHES_RCVD
 autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:39946)
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>)
 id 1bLs5c-0000qt-1t; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 09:14:36 -0400
Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1690
 helo=home-c4e4a596f7)
 by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128)
 (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>)
 id 1bLs5Z-0007Np-Ux; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 09:14:34 -0400
Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 16:14:27 +0300
Message-Id: <837fcvgdho.fsf@HIDDEN>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
In-reply-to: <CAM-tV-80t+zDrp3OPhW36YtQCqWDWCZjc3TQdoj9Aka2TiJEfQ@HIDDEN>
 (message from Noam Postavsky on Sat, 9 Jul 2016 08:55:48 -0400)
References: <CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>
 <83vb0fgu83.fsf@HIDDEN> <87k2gvhvql.fsf@HIDDEN>
 <838txbgfgx.fsf@HIDDEN>
 <CAM-tV-80t+zDrp3OPhW36YtQCqWDWCZjc3TQdoj9Aka2TiJEfQ@HIDDEN>
X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic]
X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e
X-Spam-Score: -6.3 (------)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -6.3 (------)

> From: Noam Postavsky <npostavs@HIDDEN>
> Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2016 08:55:48 -0400
> Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 8:31 AM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN> wrote:
> >> From: npostavs@HIDDEN
> >> Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> >> Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 07:54:58 -0400
> >>
> >> Yeah, it seems expected because you're familiar with the code.  But it
> >> causes Emacs to claim the "original" value is different from what it
> >> originally was, which seems nonsensical.
> >
> > It's not nonsensical, it's what actually happens, AFAIK.
> 
> What actually happens is that Emacs goes back in time to change what
> the original value was?

No, that's the plan for Emacs 42.  For now, we just compare to the
previous recorded value (computed at dump time, I presume).

> >> I wonder why Emacs saves only the original expression and not the
> >> actual original value?
> >
> > It does, but then it reevaluates at startup.
> 
> It seems it's also reevaluated every time the variable is looked at
> with customize, or describe-variable.

Quite possibly, we reevaluate a defcustom when in doubt.

The question is, given the above, do we need to actually do anything
with this report, except close it?

Message sent to bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#23926: defcustom with STANDARD=<non-pure-expression> gives confusing results
Resent-From: Noam Postavsky <npostavs@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 13:49:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.23926.B23926.146807210612618 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 23926
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Received: via spool by 23926-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B23926.146807210612618
          (code B ref 23926); Sat, 09 Jul 2016 13:49:02 +0000
Received: (at 23926) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jul 2016 13:48:26 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:43351 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1bLscM-0003HS-IP
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 09:48:26 -0400
Received: from mail-oi0-f45.google.com ([209.85.218.45]:34652)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <npostavs@HIDDEN>) id 1bLscK-0003HF-94
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 09:48:25 -0400
Received: by mail-oi0-f45.google.com with SMTP id s66so94325645oif.1
 for <23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 06:48:24 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id
 :subject:to:cc;
 bh=0EDLzxUgd3DF4YhxuEcVnXDi5ix0e4xJqbhN3oBwaNo=;
 b=Ps8laQ65CZsTiCblizbSzP6kmqdnLNjl1p7Ws0VxaDRBTGzAWDKoSVey089Qzl3nUv
 fOye33ezrUYnSobfJcAtmFXDZK3/41TcKzdkLl2PuBYIBTOiU5OChI/bjWfucisAiZIP
 lQWdvlKWMKAia956sfUYrdeuvE4HzJ7fq5qPbM/UTsO0MJqGQleynVbdLGv29nHkBgdQ
 fJ5bBkrxvLgro6ylMmtwEIg34tC86Ysb8arbFgDl/cIHaLfxMRmWLEuP1+wrcsGzSfZX
 mgZQa87vZeB/NrapYLjvRzyskIViqxDkb7b4pS4t3P7x/VCb1jGdN+FiGt20JG4HLoZe
 64Ow==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
 h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from
 :date:message-id:subject:to:cc;
 bh=0EDLzxUgd3DF4YhxuEcVnXDi5ix0e4xJqbhN3oBwaNo=;
 b=mLfDZOGfgUx2HBVIfpeVgNCDP3BMYNpOwQhMjID/c7JY9tTmQt0EGnJRtQFCOliyHa
 1lF0nNX+Xbz7ydF1ZidZa5vcHOPn+q0aen5z8l6CePENJuyHWQs5rIlW+e3i6pw4FacM
 QLdCU80XSJt3Pd0l8fvNNwp0f+tLdy+KyEAbKMeHwPSkdzHnXHynaK3qxI7UyRfbqDxH
 DxcvByw7R1YSJ29ctDmKb6S3al1gH2oJOJb2yqTEmhrC0F0bPcNGm/CSqGG235IOMdIU
 VVq7r2OHu5CxYyJyGUXrsiFVyKJfoABDXElLen1bO/nPkvW5gAYL/A75ItAomYEYajr2
 +Qlg==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tKi1xdeyOOSOxCUgbPL4T+9d2nEBjjoIXAe0dnAbcM77FJkD9DP12Sdb6dyk00m+pVU5Sene/jWuOjmRA==
X-Received: by 10.157.17.2 with SMTP id g2mr6109228ote.196.1468072098569; Sat,
 09 Jul 2016 06:48:18 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.157.4.197 with HTTP; Sat, 9 Jul 2016 06:48:18 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <837fcvgdho.fsf@HIDDEN>
References: <CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>
 <83vb0fgu83.fsf@HIDDEN> <87k2gvhvql.fsf@HIDDEN>
 <838txbgfgx.fsf@HIDDEN>
 <CAM-tV-80t+zDrp3OPhW36YtQCqWDWCZjc3TQdoj9Aka2TiJEfQ@HIDDEN>
 <837fcvgdho.fsf@HIDDEN>
From: Noam Postavsky <npostavs@HIDDEN>
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2016 09:48:18 -0400
X-Google-Sender-Auth: 48YPA9ZGdS77DAdIjgd8SH4vHJs
Message-ID: <CAM-tV--4-9NVU3BodydvqE_m1VyFUOmstbaXU7fZfdNA-xbj0w@HIDDEN>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)

On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN> wrote:
>
> For now, we just compare to the
> previous recorded value (computed at dump time, I presume).

Dump time? This doesn't apply to non-preloaded libraries though, right?

>
>> >> I wonder why Emacs saves only the original expression and not the
>> >> actual original value?
>> >
>> > It does, but then it reevaluates at startup.
>>
>> It seems it's also reevaluated every time the variable is looked at
>> with customize, or describe-variable.
>
> Quite possibly, we reevaluate a defcustom when in doubt.
>
> The question is, given the above, do we need to actually do anything
> with this report, except close it?

Either really save the original value, or don't call it the "original
value". We can't use "default value" because that's already used for
the non-buffer local value, unfortunately. I think "standard value"
could work, though Drew said it was unclear.

Message sent to bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#23926: defcustom with STANDARD=<non-pure-expression> gives confusing results
Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 14:05:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.23926.B23926.146807304314872 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 23926
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: Noam Postavsky <npostavs@HIDDEN>
Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Received: via spool by 23926-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B23926.146807304314872
          (code B ref 23926); Sat, 09 Jul 2016 14:05:02 +0000
Received: (at 23926) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jul 2016 14:04:03 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44232 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1bLsrT-0003ri-9B
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 10:04:03 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:55661)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1bLsrR-0003qq-BU
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 10:04:01 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1bLsrI-00033f-UY
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 10:03:56 -0400
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_40,RP_MATCHES_RCVD
 autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:40519)
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>)
 id 1bLsrI-00033S-Rf; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 10:03:52 -0400
Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1737
 helo=home-c4e4a596f7)
 by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128)
 (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>)
 id 1bLsrD-0004Mn-Hx; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 10:03:49 -0400
Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 17:03:39 +0300
Message-Id: <8360sehps4.fsf@HIDDEN>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
In-reply-to: <CAM-tV--4-9NVU3BodydvqE_m1VyFUOmstbaXU7fZfdNA-xbj0w@HIDDEN>
 (message from Noam Postavsky on Sat, 9 Jul 2016 09:48:18 -0400)
References: <CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>
 <83vb0fgu83.fsf@HIDDEN> <87k2gvhvql.fsf@HIDDEN>
 <838txbgfgx.fsf@HIDDEN>
 <CAM-tV-80t+zDrp3OPhW36YtQCqWDWCZjc3TQdoj9Aka2TiJEfQ@HIDDEN>
 <837fcvgdho.fsf@HIDDEN>
 <CAM-tV--4-9NVU3BodydvqE_m1VyFUOmstbaXU7fZfdNA-xbj0w@HIDDEN>
X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic]
X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e
X-Spam-Score: -6.3 (------)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -6.3 (------)

> From: Noam Postavsky <npostavs@HIDDEN>
> Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2016 09:48:18 -0400
> Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> On Sat, Jul 9, 2016 at 9:14 AM, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN> wrote:
> >
> > For now, we just compare to the
> > previous recorded value (computed at dump time, I presume).
> 
> Dump time? This doesn't apply to non-preloaded libraries though, right?

Right.

> > The question is, given the above, do we need to actually do anything
> > with this report, except close it?
> 
> Either really save the original value, or don't call it the "original
> value". We can't use "default value" because that's already used for
> the non-buffer local value, unfortunately. I think "standard value"
> could work, though Drew said it was unclear.

Why change anything in the wording at all?  It won't really change
what is being done, and won't prevent any confusion, because all this
"standard", "original", "default" etc. are not well defined anyway.

Message sent to bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#23926: defcustom with STANDARD=<non-pure-expression> gives confusing results
Resent-From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 14:10:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.23926.B23926.146807336915321 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 23926
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>, Noam Postavsky <npostavs@HIDDEN>
Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Received: via spool by 23926-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B23926.146807336915321
          (code B ref 23926); Sat, 09 Jul 2016 14:10:02 +0000
Received: (at 23926) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jul 2016 14:09:29 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44236 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1bLswi-0003z3-W4
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 10:09:29 -0400
Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:43123)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <drew.adams@HIDDEN>) id 1bLswh-0003yq-DN
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 10:09:27 -0400
Received: from aserv0021.oracle.com (aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233])
 by aserp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id
 u69E9KKh018423
 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK);
 Sat, 9 Jul 2016 14:09:21 GMT
Received: from userv0122.oracle.com (userv0122.oracle.com [156.151.31.75])
 by aserv0021.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u69E9KBr022556
 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK);
 Sat, 9 Jul 2016 14:09:20 GMT
Received: from abhmp0013.oracle.com (abhmp0013.oracle.com [141.146.116.19])
 by userv0122.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u69E9JeI020361;
 Sat, 9 Jul 2016 14:09:19 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <443f2e44-5167-48e7-abc6-cce1e243461e@default>
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2016 14:09:17 +0000 (UTC)
From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
References: <<CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>>
 <<83vb0fgu83.fsf@HIDDEN>>
In-Reply-To: <<83vb0fgu83.fsf@HIDDEN>>
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9  (901082) [OL
 12.0.6744.5000 (x86)]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Source-IP: aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233]
X-Spam-Score: -3.6 (---)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -3.6 (---)

> > (defcustom time (current-time-string) "the time" :type 'string)
> >
> > Then try to M-x customize-options RET time RET, it will show with
> > state "CHANGED outside Customize." Similarly, doing <f1> v time RET
> > shows the "original value" as the current time, not the actual value
> > when `time' was defined.
>=20
> Why is this a bug?  Seems to be expected behavior to me.

Noam can provide his explanation.  For my part:

1. The "original value" shown by `C-h v' is not the original
   value.  In fact, it might never have been the value of the
   variable, and it might never become its value.

   This much is a doc problem.  What is shown is the result
   of evaluating, in the current context, the original,
   defining Lisp sexp.

   And if this is really what we want to show then it would
   be good to also show what that Lisp sexp is.  If it is
   large then provide a button/link to show it completely.

   And it might be good to also show the actual original
   value, i.e., the value when the variable was first set,
   however it was set.  (The original value could have
   been set without evaluating the original Lisp sexp of
   the defcustom.)

2. Is it not a bug that Customize tells you that the value
   was changed outside Customize?  In what way was it
   changed outside Customize?  In fact, it was not even
   changed.

How about the reverse: Why do you think this is not a bug?
What is expected about the behavior "changed outside" or
the behavior of saying that the "original value" is something
different from the original value?

Message sent to bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#23926: defcustom with STANDARD=<non-pure-expression> gives confusing results
Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 14:13:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.23926.B23926.146807355115584 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 23926
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, npostavs@HIDDEN
Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Received: via spool by 23926-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B23926.146807355115584
          (code B ref 23926); Sat, 09 Jul 2016 14:13:02 +0000
Received: (at 23926) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jul 2016 14:12:31 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44240 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1bLszf-00043H-GZ
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 10:12:31 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:57028)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1bLsze-000437-QF
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 10:12:31 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1bLszW-0004lx-HX
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 10:12:25 -0400
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,RP_MATCHES_RCVD
 autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:40648)
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>)
 id 1bLszW-0004lt-Cq; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 10:12:22 -0400
Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1743
 helo=home-c4e4a596f7)
 by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128)
 (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>)
 id 1bLszS-0002Ro-Ot; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 10:12:19 -0400
Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 17:12:11 +0300
Message-Id: <8337nihpdw.fsf@HIDDEN>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
In-reply-to: <443f2e44-5167-48e7-abc6-cce1e243461e@default> (message from Drew
 Adams on Sat, 9 Jul 2016 14:09:17 +0000 (UTC))
References: <<CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>>
 <<83vb0fgu83.fsf@HIDDEN>> <443f2e44-5167-48e7-abc6-cce1e243461e@default>
X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic]
X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e
X-Spam-Score: -6.3 (------)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -6.3 (------)

> Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2016 14:09:17 +0000 (UTC)
> From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
> Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> 2. Is it not a bug that Customize tells you that the value
>    was changed outside Customize?  In what way was it
>    changed outside Customize?  In fact, it was not even
>    changed.

It was changed, because each time the sexp is evaluated it yields a
different value.  "Outside Customize" means not by the user who is
typing values into the Custom buffer and saves those values by using
the "set state" menu.

> How about the reverse: Why do you think this is not a bug?

See above.

Message sent to bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#23926: defcustom with STANDARD=<non-pure-expression> gives confusing results
Resent-From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 14:35:01 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.23926.B23926.146807485417497 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 23926
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: Noam Postavsky <npostavs@HIDDEN>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Received: via spool by 23926-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B23926.146807485417497
          (code B ref 23926); Sat, 09 Jul 2016 14:35:01 +0000
Received: (at 23926) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jul 2016 14:34:14 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44247 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1bLtKg-0004Y8-CL
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 10:34:14 -0400
Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:50438)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <drew.adams@HIDDEN>) id 1bLtKf-0004Xw-JD
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 10:34:13 -0400
Received: from aserv0021.oracle.com (aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233])
 by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id
 u69EY5s2027457
 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK);
 Sat, 9 Jul 2016 14:34:05 GMT
Received: from userv0121.oracle.com (userv0121.oracle.com [156.151.31.72])
 by aserv0021.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u69EY3kE018370
 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK);
 Sat, 9 Jul 2016 14:34:04 GMT
Received: from abhmp0013.oracle.com (abhmp0013.oracle.com [141.146.116.19])
 by userv0121.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u69EY1Zd028914;
 Sat, 9 Jul 2016 14:34:02 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <f5553151-5e5a-4e98-8b2b-23af63b81cb2@default>
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2016 14:34:00 +0000 (UTC)
From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
References: <CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>
 <83vb0fgu83.fsf@HIDDEN> <87k2gvhvql.fsf@HIDDEN>
 <838txbgfgx.fsf@HIDDEN>
 <CAM-tV-80t+zDrp3OPhW36YtQCqWDWCZjc3TQdoj9Aka2TiJEfQ@HIDDEN>
 <837fcvgdho.fsf@HIDDEN>
 <CAM-tV--4-9NVU3BodydvqE_m1VyFUOmstbaXU7fZfdNA-xbj0w@HIDDEN>
In-Reply-To: <CAM-tV--4-9NVU3BodydvqE_m1VyFUOmstbaXU7fZfdNA-xbj0w@HIDDEN>
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9  (901082) [OL
 12.0.6744.5000 (x86)]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Source-IP: aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233]
X-Spam-Score: -3.6 (---)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -3.6 (---)

> Either really save the original value, or don't call it the "original
> value". We can't use "default value" because that's already used for
> the non-buffer local value, unfortunately. I think "standard value"
> could work, though Drew said it was unclear.

If it is what custom calls the "standard value", which is what
you get when you `Reset to Standard Setting', then I don't
think it is wrong to use that name here.

But I think that `C-h v' - or at a minimum somewhere in the
manual - should point out what is happening here:

The value shown is the result of re-evaluating, in the current
context, the original expression that was used to define the
initial value.

Each part of that sentence is important to understanding what
this is.  We should not just suppose that all of that is
understood by a user, just by providing a label such as
"standard value" (let alone a misleading label such as
"original value").

It's OK to just provide a (reasonable) label, I guess, _if_
it is clearly defined somewhere in the doc.

I really think that it would be good to show in `C-h v'
(also), the original expression.  That is available in
Customize (good), by choosing `Show Saved Lisp Expression'.

But if we are going to show, in `C-h v', what is currently
called "original value" there, then we should (1) use a
better name for it (e.g. "standard value") and (2) provide
also the expression that it was re-evaluated from.

As for how to show that expression: if small, show it inline;
if large, show it on demand (e.g. clicking an expand button).

Message sent to bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#23926: defcustom with STANDARD=<non-pure-expression> gives confusing results
Resent-From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 14:55:01 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.23926.B23926.146807607019353 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 23926
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>, Noam Postavsky <npostavs@HIDDEN>
Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Received: via spool by 23926-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B23926.146807607019353
          (code B ref 23926); Sat, 09 Jul 2016 14:55:01 +0000
Received: (at 23926) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jul 2016 14:54:30 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44265 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1bLteI-000525-4C
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 10:54:30 -0400
Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:17483)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <drew.adams@HIDDEN>) id 1bLteG-00051r-Dm
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 10:54:28 -0400
Received: from userv0022.oracle.com (userv0022.oracle.com [156.151.31.74])
 by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id
 u69EsLQ1007677
 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK);
 Sat, 9 Jul 2016 14:54:22 GMT
Received: from aserv0121.oracle.com (aserv0121.oracle.com [141.146.126.235])
 by userv0022.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u69EsKT9016500
 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK);
 Sat, 9 Jul 2016 14:54:21 GMT
Received: from abhmp0013.oracle.com (abhmp0013.oracle.com [141.146.116.19])
 by aserv0121.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u69EsJAE023105;
 Sat, 9 Jul 2016 14:54:20 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <fdca925b-a904-48fb-bc53-425dd59e10cf@default>
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2016 14:54:18 +0000 (UTC)
From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
References: <<CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>
 <83vb0fgu83.fsf@HIDDEN>> <<87k2gvhvql.fsf@HIDDEN>
 <838txbgfgx.fsf@HIDDEN>
 <CAM-tV-80t+zDrp3OPhW36YtQCqWDWCZjc3TQdoj9Aka2TiJEfQ@HIDDEN>
 <837fcvgdho.fsf@HIDDEN>
 <CAM-tV--4-9NVU3BodydvqE_m1VyFUOmstbaXU7fZfdNA-xbj0w@HIDDEN>>
 <<8360sehps4.fsf@HIDDEN>>
In-Reply-To: <<8360sehps4.fsf@HIDDEN>>
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9  (901082) [OL
 12.0.6744.5000 (x86)]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Source-IP: userv0022.oracle.com [156.151.31.74]
X-Spam-Score: -3.6 (---)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -3.6 (---)

> Why change anything in the wording at all?  It won't really change
> what is being done, and won't prevent any confusion, because all this
> "standard", "original", "default" etc. are not well defined anyway.

Maybe you mean that they have not been well defined in our help
for the user?  Because the standard value is well defined in
Customize, and it is referred to as such in the Customize UI.
("Original" and "default" are admittedly not so well defined.)

What's missing is to call it by the same name in `C-h v'.
And to provide some description/explanation in the doc, if it
is not there now (I haven't searched just now).

IOW, let's try to be clear with the labelling in `C-h v' -
consistent with the names used in Customize.  And let's try to
let users of `C-h v' get more info about what they're looking
at, to dispel confusion and answer questions.

I think we should also have `C-h v' provide the underlying
Lisp expression, at least on demand, just as Customize does.
It's not great to show only a value without any indication
of what it comes from.

As for whether to call the value shown "standard value":
IIUC, the standard value is:

;;    the value given in the 'defcustom' declaration.
;;    It is stored in the 'standard-value' property of the
;;    option, in a cons-cell whose car evaluates to the standard
;;    value.

That wording is maybe not perfect.  But IIUC, the value of the
`standard-value' property is not the "standard value".  Instead,
it is a cons whose car _evaluates_ to the standard value.  Its
car is, I guess, the original Lisp expression from the defcustom.

That is what needs to be made clear to users, I think, when
showing them a value.  Let them know that it is called the
"standard value", and it is the result of re-evaluating, in
the current context, the defining Lisp sexp for the option
(which is used in the defcustom).=20

All of this is important for clarity.  In particular, I think
it is important that users understand the following, which is
I guess what is behind Eli saying that the behavior is as
expected:

;; The reason for storing values unevaluated: This is so you can have
;; values that depend on the environment.  For example, you can have a
;; variable that has one value when Emacs is running under a window
;; system, and another value on a tty.  Since the evaluation is only done
;; when the variable is first initialized, this is only relevant for the
;; saved (and standard) values, but affect others values for
;; compatibility.

The premise of that last sentence is wrong, of course.  It is done
each time you use `C-h v' - to show you the "original" value.

But the main point here is that it is a _feature_, not a bug, that
the "standard value" is recomputed at any time from the original sexp.
Why/how this is a feature is explained well in that paragraph.

But without such an explanation, and especially just showing a
value in `C-h v' and calling it the "original" value, we hurt
instead of help users.

;; You can see (and modify and save) this unevaluated value by selecting
;; "Show Saved Lisp Expression" from the Lisp interface.  This will
;; give you the unevaluated saved value, if any, otherwise the
;; unevaluated standard value.

And that's the other piece that helps understanding.  I think
`C-h v' should show users that Lisp sexp - at least on demand.

That will also help understanding of the standard value that is
shown (and should be labeled as such): `C-h v' can say that this
is the result of re-evaluating the Lisp sexp.

Message sent to bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#23926: defcustom with STANDARD=<non-pure-expression> gives confusing results
Resent-From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 15:00:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.23926.B23926.146807635719808 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 23926
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>, Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, npostavs@HIDDEN
Received: via spool by 23926-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B23926.146807635719808
          (code B ref 23926); Sat, 09 Jul 2016 15:00:02 +0000
Received: (at 23926) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jul 2016 14:59:17 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44274 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1bLtiv-00059Q-Kk
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 10:59:17 -0400
Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:18124)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <drew.adams@HIDDEN>) id 1bLtiu-00059C-FX
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 10:59:16 -0400
Received: from userv0022.oracle.com (userv0022.oracle.com [156.151.31.74])
 by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id
 u69ExAtr010596
 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK);
 Sat, 9 Jul 2016 14:59:10 GMT
Received: from userv0121.oracle.com (userv0121.oracle.com [156.151.31.72])
 by userv0022.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u69ExAJ7022000
 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK);
 Sat, 9 Jul 2016 14:59:10 GMT
Received: from abhmp0013.oracle.com (abhmp0013.oracle.com [141.146.116.19])
 by userv0121.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u69Ex8u4002858;
 Sat, 9 Jul 2016 14:59:09 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <c0dd88c2-51ef-4f4f-964c-f0254db970f7@default>
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2016 14:59:06 +0000 (UTC)
From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
References: <<<CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>>>
 <<<83vb0fgu83.fsf@HIDDEN>>> <<443f2e44-5167-48e7-abc6-cce1e243461e@default>>
 <<8337nihpdw.fsf@HIDDEN>>
In-Reply-To: <<8337nihpdw.fsf@HIDDEN>>
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9  (901082) [OL
 12.0.6744.5000 (x86)]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Source-IP: userv0022.oracle.com [156.151.31.74]
X-Spam-Score: -3.6 (---)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -3.6 (---)

> > 2. Is it not a bug that Customize tells you that the value
> >    was changed outside Customize?  In what way was it
> >    changed outside Customize?  In fact, it was not even
> >    changed.
>=20
> It was changed,=20

The option value was changed?  I don't think so.

The standard value (labeled "original" in `C-h v') is changed
each time the sexp is evaluated.  But the option value is not.

The option value was not changed at all in the recipe Noam gave.
It was and remained exactly what it was from the defcustom.
The mere fact of entering Customize did not change its value,
and nothing else changed its value.  It still has the original
value from when the defcustom was evaluated.

> because each time the sexp is evaluated it yields a
> different value.

See above.

> "Outside Customize" means not by the user who is typing values
> into the Custom buffer and saves those values by using the
> "set state" menu.

Correct.  And nothing changed the option value at all.  Not
that way or any other way.  It remains as it was from defcustom.

> > How about the reverse: Why do you think this is not a bug?
>=20
> See above.

See above.  Do you still think this is not a bug?

Message sent to bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#23926: defcustom with STANDARD=<non-pure-expression> gives confusing results
Resent-From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 15:10:01 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.23926.B23926.146807697020785 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 23926
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>, Noam Postavsky <npostavs@HIDDEN>
Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Received: via spool by 23926-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B23926.146807697020785
          (code B ref 23926); Sat, 09 Jul 2016 15:10:01 +0000
Received: (at 23926) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jul 2016 15:09:30 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44287 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1bLtso-0005PB-1n
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 11:09:30 -0400
Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:51454)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <drew.adams@HIDDEN>) id 1bLtsm-0005Oy-G8
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 11:09:29 -0400
Received: from aserv0022.oracle.com (aserv0022.oracle.com [141.146.126.234])
 by aserp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id
 u69F9J7i024770
 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK);
 Sat, 9 Jul 2016 15:09:19 GMT
Received: from userv0122.oracle.com (userv0122.oracle.com [156.151.31.75])
 by aserv0022.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u69F9InH010203
 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK);
 Sat, 9 Jul 2016 15:09:19 GMT
Received: from abhmp0013.oracle.com (abhmp0013.oracle.com [141.146.116.19])
 by userv0122.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u69F9Hr6004819;
 Sat, 9 Jul 2016 15:09:17 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <bb67bf97-6507-4f94-bf7a-eccdc1bd087e@default>
Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2016 15:09:16 +0000 (UTC)
From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
References: <<CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>
 <83vb0fgu83.fsf@HIDDEN>> <<87k2gvhvql.fsf@HIDDEN>
 <838txbgfgx.fsf@HIDDEN>
 <CAM-tV-80t+zDrp3OPhW36YtQCqWDWCZjc3TQdoj9Aka2TiJEfQ@HIDDEN>
 <837fcvgdho.fsf@HIDDEN>
 <CAM-tV--4-9NVU3BodydvqE_m1VyFUOmstbaXU7fZfdNA-xbj0w@HIDDEN>>
 <<8360sehps4.fsf@HIDDEN>> <fdca925b-a904-48fb-bc53-425dd59e10cf@default>
In-Reply-To: <fdca925b-a904-48fb-bc53-425dd59e10cf@default>
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9  (901082) [OL
 12.0.6744.5000 (x86)]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Source-IP: aserv0022.oracle.com [141.146.126.234]
X-Spam-Score: -3.6 (---)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -3.6 (---)

Note, BTW, that this erroneous display of "original value"
by `C-h v' is not something that has been in Emacs long.

It was added in Emacs 24.1.  It should have been corrected
sooner than now, but it wasn't.  Now is a good time.

Message sent to bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#23926: defcustom with STANDARD=<non-pure-expression> gives confusing results
Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 16:53:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.23926.B23926.14680831773752 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 23926
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, npostavs@HIDDEN
Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Received: via spool by 23926-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B23926.14680831773752
          (code B ref 23926); Sat, 09 Jul 2016 16:53:02 +0000
Received: (at 23926) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jul 2016 16:52:57 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44315 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1bLvUv-0000yR-Jo
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 12:52:57 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:51042)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1bLvUt-0000yD-Jp
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 12:52:55 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1bLvUk-0005Tz-5T
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 12:52:50 -0400
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_40,RP_MATCHES_RCVD
 autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:43688)
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>)
 id 1bLvUk-0005Tf-2G; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 12:52:46 -0400
Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1894
 helo=home-c4e4a596f7)
 by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128)
 (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>)
 id 1bLvUh-0002yr-V5; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 12:52:44 -0400
Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 19:52:36 +0300
Message-Id: <83zipqg3e3.fsf@HIDDEN>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
In-reply-to: <c0dd88c2-51ef-4f4f-964c-f0254db970f7@default> (message from Drew
 Adams on Sat, 9 Jul 2016 14:59:06 +0000 (UTC))
References: <<<CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>>>
 <<<83vb0fgu83.fsf@HIDDEN>>> <<443f2e44-5167-48e7-abc6-cce1e243461e@default>>
 <<8337nihpdw.fsf@HIDDEN>> <c0dd88c2-51ef-4f4f-964c-f0254db970f7@default>
X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic]
X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e
X-Spam-Score: -6.3 (------)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -6.3 (------)

> Date: Sat, 9 Jul 2016 14:59:06 +0000 (UTC)
> From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
> Cc: npostavs@HIDDEN, 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> > > 2. Is it not a bug that Customize tells you that the value
> > >    was changed outside Customize?  In what way was it
> > >    changed outside Customize?  In fact, it was not even
> > >    changed.
> > 
> > It was changed, 
> 
> The option value was changed?  I don't think so.

Yes, it was changed, because the value returned by the function
changes each time it's called.

> See above.  Do you still think this is not a bug?

Of course, I do.  Maybe you don't realize how many times Emacs
evaluates the value of a defcustom, but I do.

Message sent to bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#23926: defcustom with STANDARD=<non-pure-expression> gives confusing results
Resent-From: npostavs@HIDDEN
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 20:49:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.23926.B23926.14680973145985 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 23926
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
Received: via spool by 23926-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B23926.14680973145985
          (code B ref 23926); Sat, 09 Jul 2016 20:49:02 +0000
Received: (at 23926) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Jul 2016 20:48:34 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44406 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1bLzAw-0001YT-HY
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 16:48:34 -0400
Received: from mail-it0-f50.google.com ([209.85.214.50]:36919)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <npostavs@HIDDEN>) id 1bLzAs-0001YC-UU
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 16:48:32 -0400
Received: by mail-it0-f50.google.com with SMTP id f6so28899819ith.0
 for <23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Sat, 09 Jul 2016 13:48:30 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id
 :user-agent:mime-version;
 bh=mHiTSUr0Xlt69bDUH5EtNP+bGmuIuwzjUucoBR9j9Pk=;
 b=IRRu933nlxVH2wALGZhnyz2EgCUZcIsHSWdD4I69qTut11Dk0Rm0pDH4EHVZXfxqVg
 ilkXev36rbfXT3q7xoRLs13jpzw0ebb/pRLQAf+0fWqYi3JG1F2kqvDAO+nspQhJGU9w
 Kgg3MZ7vqNTOUaAwdeRi/9lWcRb/3Vyd0fEaC4eZ8P2tPD7RdjWTaFzu5MQpXbjmbcym
 SgH3iW99QCVZ990+e7Ez9pWLhPynWiCzMFKjTVYSSuyqB7e0YQtjnwn5/F3eOqqcejak
 uOAZum8/KM2S1tyqPmsr1VEffTcvM7MFbyx7t6z9KMULVeqQVABbwyU39GyTUzUgXhEh
 HWlg==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
 h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date
 :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version;
 bh=mHiTSUr0Xlt69bDUH5EtNP+bGmuIuwzjUucoBR9j9Pk=;
 b=dil40sBcXUw3raWE7pP7gZcT9AXkFOckOpQZJD+Ghfn4MicvOSO0qgSAAgIED0Zufc
 HKvU5FItI63uFAtUNrdYIysZxkP53z7B0GbSTbqeKkvepQ41OMr7pXzM9WEvEcwuj21t
 KXu3IvEed1Wzipi5Ycqd79uK2y4Tj2pZvGG0yaVYSneQsQJDOUOxx2tcyehh2PthzUzg
 wo4j1Fi8bPYbT0JyAzs2XK7l3zxGeIR6oP3R5qagThbnqg4c8Ezb5Km/2nqDrw+y31vY
 nQGA5Lab/rDmcKlWIsufnDRtI/4OmUWY/FmyBOUX30I1py/6yFrrkqLU7nK8hoWUyHE4
 qkqA==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tJFNa4LA20CCXci+JT2HrytSkrJEkdiocqvGI5CpIRO7L/lbHq4wxpbxpuhRuWWug==
X-Received: by 10.36.69.4 with SMTP id y4mr4088989ita.49.1468097305436;
 Sat, 09 Jul 2016 13:48:25 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zony (206-188-64-44.cpe.distributel.net. [206.188.64.44])
 by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id w78sm4068610ita.3.2016.07.09.13.48.24
 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
 Sat, 09 Jul 2016 13:48:24 -0700 (PDT)
From: npostavs@HIDDEN
References: <CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>>>
 <83vb0fgu83.fsf@HIDDEN>>> <443f2e44-5167-48e7-abc6-cce1e243461e@default>>
 <8337nihpdw.fsf@HIDDEN>> <c0dd88c2-51ef-4f4f-964c-f0254db970f7@default>
 <83zipqg3e3.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 16:48:23 -0400
In-Reply-To: <83zipqg3e3.fsf@HIDDEN> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 09 Jul
 2016 19:52:36 +0300")
Message-ID: <871t32ilm0.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.93 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN> writes:
> Of course, I do.  Maybe you don't realize how many times Emacs
> evaluates the value of a defcustom, but I do.

What about making Emacs evaluate it less? e.g. replace occurences of
(eval (car (get var 'standard-value))) with

(or (get var 'original-value)
    (let ((val (eval (car (get var 'standard-value)))))
      (put var 'original-value val)
      val))

Wrapped in a function of course, call it custom-get-standard-value?

Message sent to bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#23926: defcustom with STANDARD=<non-pure-expression> gives confusing results
Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2016 14:20:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.23926.B23926.146816036925421 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 23926
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: npostavs@HIDDEN
Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, drew.adams@HIDDEN
Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Received: via spool by 23926-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B23926.146816036925421
          (code B ref 23926); Sun, 10 Jul 2016 14:20:02 +0000
Received: (at 23926) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Jul 2016 14:19:29 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45196 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1bMFZw-0006bv-MU
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 10 Jul 2016 10:19:28 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:36396)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1bMFZu-0006bi-UE
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 10 Jul 2016 10:19:27 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1bMFZo-0002BR-OZ
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 10 Jul 2016 10:19:21 -0400
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,RP_MATCHES_RCVD
 autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:56125)
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>)
 id 1bMFZo-0002BN-LC; Sun, 10 Jul 2016 10:19:20 -0400
Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:2831
 helo=home-c4e4a596f7)
 by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128)
 (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>)
 id 1bMFZn-00082C-Sj; Sun, 10 Jul 2016 10:19:20 -0400
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2016 17:19:15 +0300
Message-Id: <83k2gtfue4.fsf@HIDDEN>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
In-reply-to: <871t32ilm0.fsf@HIDDEN>
 (npostavs@HIDDEN)
References: <CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>>>
 <83vb0fgu83.fsf@HIDDEN>>> <443f2e44-5167-48e7-abc6-cce1e243461e@default>>
 <8337nihpdw.fsf@HIDDEN>> <c0dd88c2-51ef-4f4f-964c-f0254db970f7@default>
 <83zipqg3e3.fsf@HIDDEN> <871t32ilm0.fsf@HIDDEN>
X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic]
X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e
X-Spam-Score: -6.3 (------)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -6.3 (------)

> From: npostavs@HIDDEN
> Cc: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>,  23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Sat, 09 Jul 2016 16:48:23 -0400
> 
> > Of course, I do.  Maybe you don't realize how many times Emacs
> > evaluates the value of a defcustom, but I do.
> 
> What about making Emacs evaluate it less? e.g. replace occurences of
> (eval (car (get var 'standard-value))) with
> 
> (or (get var 'original-value)
>     (let ((val (eval (car (get var 'standard-value)))))
>       (put var 'original-value val)
>       val))

What will that do to the likes of custom-reevaluate-setting?

FWIW, I wouldn't try making any such changes in this area.  The number
of evaluations and the precise triggers for evaluating a defcustom is
a fragile setup, and I'd hate breaking it.  Certainly not for a
marginal use case such as the one in this report.  In effect, whoever
uses current-time-string as a defcustom's value tells Emacs that the
value is not important, because the programmer has no idea when in the
process of building and restarting Emacs will the value be taken.  Why
does it make sense to rock the boat in this sensitive area for such
use cases?

Message sent to bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#23926: defcustom with STANDARD=<non-pure-expression> gives confusing results
Resent-From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2016 17:19:01 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.23926.B23926.14681711182670 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 23926
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>, npostavs@HIDDEN
Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Received: via spool by 23926-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B23926.14681711182670
          (code B ref 23926); Sun, 10 Jul 2016 17:19:01 +0000
Received: (at 23926) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Jul 2016 17:18:38 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45494 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1bMINK-0000h0-5S
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 10 Jul 2016 13:18:38 -0400
Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:39571)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <drew.adams@HIDDEN>) id 1bMINI-0000gg-PY
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 10 Jul 2016 13:18:37 -0400
Received: from aserv0021.oracle.com (aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233])
 by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id
 u6AHITrG000368
 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK);
 Sun, 10 Jul 2016 17:18:30 GMT
Received: from userv0122.oracle.com (userv0122.oracle.com [156.151.31.75])
 by aserv0021.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u6AHITl3020409
 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK);
 Sun, 10 Jul 2016 17:18:29 GMT
Received: from abhmp0016.oracle.com (abhmp0016.oracle.com [141.146.116.22])
 by userv0122.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u6AHISRF021365;
 Sun, 10 Jul 2016 17:18:28 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <39c015f2-3ebf-43e8-9a37-9b50382042a7@default>
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2016 10:18:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
References: <<CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>>>
 <83vb0fgu83.fsf@HIDDEN>>>> <<443f2e44-5167-48e7-abc6-cce1e243461e@default>>
 <8337nihpdw.fsf@HIDDEN>>> <<c0dd88c2-51ef-4f4f-964c-f0254db970f7@default>
 <83zipqg3e3.fsf@HIDDEN>> <<871t32ilm0.fsf@HIDDEN>>
 <<83k2gtfue4.fsf@HIDDEN>>
In-Reply-To: <<83k2gtfue4.fsf@HIDDEN>>
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9  (901082) [OL
 12.0.6744.5000 (x86)]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Source-IP: aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233]
X-Spam-Score: -3.6 (---)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -3.6 (---)

> whoever uses current-time-string as a defcustom's value tells Emacs that
> the value is not important, because the programmer has no idea when in
> the process of building and restarting Emacs will the value be taken.
> Why does it make sense to rock the boat in this sensitive area for such
> use cases?

Obviously, `(current-time)' was an example, to demo show the problem.

It can sometimes make a lot of sense for a defcustom to use a sexp
that might not return the same result when reevaluated.

The original bug, from which this report is an offshoot, was #4755.
The example there used this defcustom sexp: `(copy-sequence foo)'.

And in the context of the using code there is nothing wrong with
such a sexp: the intention is really to use, as default value, a
(new) list whose elements are the (exact same) elements as those
in the list `foo'.

And yes, this (intentionally) means that the user option, `toto',
that has this value can share the objects that are its initial
elements.  Nothing wrong with using such an initial value for a
user option.

The problem is not with being able to make use of such a sexp for
the default value.  The problem is with how Emacs talks about the
state of the option value.  It miscommunicates to users.  That's
what this bug is about: how Emacs talks about what is going on.

Message sent to bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#23926: defcustom with STANDARD=<non-pure-expression> gives confusing results
Resent-From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2016 17:19:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.23926.B23926.14681711212680 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 23926
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>, Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, npostavs@HIDDEN
Received: via spool by 23926-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B23926.14681711212680
          (code B ref 23926); Sun, 10 Jul 2016 17:19:02 +0000
Received: (at 23926) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Jul 2016 17:18:41 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45496 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1bMINN-0000hA-Bt
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 10 Jul 2016 13:18:41 -0400
Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:39575)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <drew.adams@HIDDEN>) id 1bMINJ-0000gi-JF
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 10 Jul 2016 13:18:38 -0400
Received: from userv0022.oracle.com (userv0022.oracle.com [156.151.31.74])
 by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id
 u6AHIVEG000418
 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK);
 Sun, 10 Jul 2016 17:18:31 GMT
Received: from userv0121.oracle.com (userv0121.oracle.com [156.151.31.72])
 by userv0022.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u6AHIVSO026760
 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK);
 Sun, 10 Jul 2016 17:18:31 GMT
Received: from abhmp0016.oracle.com (abhmp0016.oracle.com [141.146.116.22])
 by userv0121.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u6AHIVle015090;
 Sun, 10 Jul 2016 17:18:31 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <ff33c2cc-337a-433b-a87a-0ea1814311d2@default>
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2016 10:18:29 -0700 (PDT)
From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
References: <<<<CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>>>>
 <<<<83vb0fgu83.fsf@HIDDEN>>>>
 <<<443f2e44-5167-48e7-abc6-cce1e243461e@default>>>
 <<<8337nihpdw.fsf@HIDDEN>>> <<c0dd88c2-51ef-4f4f-964c-f0254db970f7@default>>
 <<83zipqg3e3.fsf@HIDDEN>>
In-Reply-To: <<83zipqg3e3.fsf@HIDDEN>>
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9  (901082) [OL
 12.0.6744.5000 (x86)]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Source-IP: userv0022.oracle.com [156.151.31.74]
X-Spam-Score: -3.6 (---)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -3.6 (---)

> > > > 2. Is it not a bug that Customize tells you that the value
> > > >    was changed outside Customize?  In what way was it
> > > >    changed outside Customize?  In fact, it was not even
> > > >    changed.
> > >
> > > It was changed,
> >
> > The option value was changed?  I don't think so.
>=20
> Yes, it was changed, because the value returned by the function
> changes each time it's called.

What function?  And what occurrence of calling it do you think
is responsible for this characterization of the value having
been changed outside Customize?

The fact is that the user did NOT change the value outside
customize.  And in fact, the value has NOT been changed.
It is what it was when the defcustom was evaluated.

The responsible code is `custom-variable-state', specifically
this part:

(setq tmp (get symbol 'standard-value))
(if (condition-case nil
        (and (equal value (eval (car tmp))) (equal comment nil))
      (error nil))
    'standard
  'changed)

That tests whether the current value (var VALUE here), which
in this case came from (default-value 'time), is equal to
the result of RE-evaluating the defining defcustom sexp,
(current-time).  And of course it is not equal, because
time passes...

The reason it is not unequal is NOT because something has
changed the option value outside Customize.  The option
value has not been changed at all.  What "changes" here is
the result of evaluating the initial sexp.

IOW, the "changed-outside-Customize" test used is too simplistic. =20

Note that the code does try to correct its own logic in some
cases - for example, in this case:

;; The value was originally set outside
;; custom, but it was set to the standard
;; value (probably an autoloaded defcustom).

This but shows another case where its too-simplistic logic
trips it up, but this case is not being handled (compensated
for).

Nothing, including anything the user has done, has changed
the value outside Customize.  But the customize code is, so
far, unable to recognize that.

The code blithely assumes that evaluating what `custom-get'
returns represents the original value, whereas what it returns
is the result of RE-evaluating the original sexp.  That is
precisely the point of this bug.

The code correctly compensates in the case mentioned in
the comment cited above.  But it does not compensate in
the case demonstrated by the simple recipe Noam provided:

(defcustom time (current-time-string) "the time" :type 'string)

A _single_ evaluation of that defcustom should not throw
Customize off into thinking that the value has been changed
outside Customize.  And that is what is happening, because
its determination of "changed outside Customize" is too
simplistic.

> > See above.  Do you still think this is not a bug?
>=20
> Of course, I do.  Maybe you don't realize how many times
> Emacs evaluates the value of a defcustom, but I do.

Please don't patronize us.  Everyone respects your understanding
of Emacs and Customize, but in this case I think you are wrong.

It is not a question of "how many times Emacs evaluates the
value of a defcustom".  It is about Emacs interpreting a
difference in the value returned by evaluating the defcustom
defining sexp from the current value as always representing a
change in the value of the variable (and outside Customize, to
boot).

I think we understand what is happening.  For us, telling the
user that the value has CHANGED from its original setting is
clearly wrong, since the VALUE has not changed.

And saying that it was changed outside Customize is doubly
wrong, since no user code or user action has done anything
to the value anywhere, including outside Customize.  This is
Customize stepping stepping on its own feet, and as a result
misleading users.

As for _fixing_ this part of the bug (the misleading state):

I don't see a solution other than doing either of these, but
other ideas are welcome:

1. Save also the original _value_ and compare the current
   value with that, instead of with the result of reevaluating
   the standard-value sexp.

2. Try to better characterize the state to users.  Instead
   of calling it changed-outside-customize, somehow indicate
   what it really means: the current value is not the same
   as what you get by reevaluating the defining sexp.

And then there is the other part of this bug: what to do for
`C-h v'.  I'll speak to that in a separate reply.

Message sent to bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#23926: defcustom with STANDARD=<non-pure-expression> gives confusing results
Resent-From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2016 17:24:01 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.23926.B23926.14681714043165 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 23926
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>, Noam Postavsky <npostavs@HIDDEN>
Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Received: via spool by 23926-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B23926.14681714043165
          (code B ref 23926); Sun, 10 Jul 2016 17:24:01 +0000
Received: (at 23926) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Jul 2016 17:23:24 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45505 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1bMIRw-0000oz-Af
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 10 Jul 2016 13:23:24 -0400
Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:40005)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <drew.adams@HIDDEN>) id 1bMIRt-0000ol-P5
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 10 Jul 2016 13:23:22 -0400
Received: from aserv0021.oracle.com (aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233])
 by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id
 u6AHNFSQ003134
 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK);
 Sun, 10 Jul 2016 17:23:15 GMT
Received: from aserv0121.oracle.com (aserv0121.oracle.com [141.146.126.235])
 by aserv0021.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u6AHNF79025731
 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK);
 Sun, 10 Jul 2016 17:23:15 GMT
Received: from abhmp0016.oracle.com (abhmp0016.oracle.com [141.146.116.22])
 by aserv0121.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u6AHNEMw017682;
 Sun, 10 Jul 2016 17:23:14 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <33b89b73-733f-42a1-9d26-eb0ed3c8d9cc@default>
Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2016 10:23:13 -0700 (PDT)
From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
References: <<CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>
 <83vb0fgu83.fsf@HIDDEN>> <<87k2gvhvql.fsf@HIDDEN>
 <838txbgfgx.fsf@HIDDEN>
 <CAM-tV-80t+zDrp3OPhW36YtQCqWDWCZjc3TQdoj9Aka2TiJEfQ@HIDDEN>
 <837fcvgdho.fsf@HIDDEN>
 <CAM-tV--4-9NVU3BodydvqE_m1VyFUOmstbaXU7fZfdNA-xbj0w@HIDDEN>>
 <<8360sehps4.fsf@HIDDEN>> <fdca925b-a904-48fb-bc53-425dd59e10cf@default>
In-Reply-To: <fdca925b-a904-48fb-bc53-425dd59e10cf@default>
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9  (901082) [OL
 12.0.6744.5000 (x86)]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Source-IP: aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233]
X-Spam-Score: -3.6 (---)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -3.6 (---)

> IOW, let's try to be clear with the labelling in `C-h v' -
> consistent with the names used in Customize.  And let's try to
> let users of `C-h v' get more info about what they're looking
> at, to dispel confusion and answer questions.
>=20
> I think we should also have `C-h v' provide the underlying
> Lisp expression, at least on demand, just as Customize does.
> It's not great to show only a value without any indication
> of what it comes from.
...
> That is what needs to be made clear to users, I think, when
> showing them a value.  Let them know that it is called the
> "standard value", and it is the result of re-evaluating, in
> the current context, the defining Lisp sexp for the option
> (which is used in the defcustom).
>=20
> All of this is important for clarity.  In particular, I think
> it is important that users understand the following, which is
> I guess what is behind Eli saying that the behavior is as
> expected:
>=20
> ;; The reason for storing values unevaluated: This is so you can have
> ;; values that depend on the environment.  For example, you can have a
> ;; variable that has one value when Emacs is running under a window
> ;; system, and another value on a tty.  Since the evaluation is only done
> ;; when the variable is first initialized, this is only relevant for the
> ;; saved (and standard) values, but affect others values for
> ;; compatibility.
>=20
> The premise of that last sentence is wrong, of course.  It is done
> each time you use `C-h v' - to show you the "original" value.
>=20
> But the main point here is that it is a _feature_, not a bug, that
> the "standard value" is recomputed at any time from the original sexp.
> Why/how this is a feature is explained well in that paragraph.
>=20
> But without such an explanation, and especially just showing a
> value in `C-h v' and calling it the "original" value, we hurt
> instead of help users.
>=20
> ;; You can see (and modify and save) this unevaluated value by selecting
> ;; "Show Saved Lisp Expression" from the Lisp interface.  This will
> ;; give you the unevaluated saved value, if any, otherwise the
> ;; unevaluated standard value.
>=20
> And that's the other piece that helps understanding.  I think
> `C-h v' should show users that Lisp sexp - at least on demand.
>=20
> That will also help understanding of the standard value that is
> shown (and should be labeled as such): `C-h v' can say that this
> is the result of re-evaluating the Lisp sexp.

Here are a couple proposals for how to fix the `C-h v' part of
this bug.  Others are welcome.

1. Not print the "original value" at all, as was the case before
   Emacs 24.  Let users get such info from Customize.

2. Like #1, but give users a hint that such info is in fact
   available from Customize.  My suggestion here would be to not
   only remove printing the "original value" but to change the text
   "You can customize this variable.", where `customize' is a link to
   Customize, with this text, all of it a link with the same target:

      Customize or inspect

   (or possibly "Inspect or customize").  The point is for the
   link text to indicate that the target (Customize for the option)
   is not only for changing the value but also for finding out more
   about the option and its customization.

3. Like #1 and #3, but also provide a (toggle) link to show the
   defining Lisp sexp for the default value or, if it is shown,
   to reevaluate it and show the result:

      Show Lisp sexp defining the default value

   (if not shown) and

      Reevaluate

   (if shown - displayed just above it, in place of "Show Lisp sexp
   defining the default value").

I think any of these would improve the `C-h v' doc, especially for
this situation where the Lisp sexp can return different values.

If you decide to go for any of these approaches I could work on
a patch.

(Note that this mail is only about the `C-h v' part of the bug.
It does not address the part that concerns how the Customize UI
talks about the state - see my previous message about that part.)

Message sent to bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#23926: defcustom with STANDARD=<non-pure-expression> gives confusing results
Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 18:42:01 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.23926.B23926.14682624636179 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 23926
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, npostavs@HIDDEN
Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Received: via spool by 23926-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B23926.14682624636179
          (code B ref 23926); Mon, 11 Jul 2016 18:42:01 +0000
Received: (at 23926) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Jul 2016 18:41:03 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47203 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1bMg8d-0001bb-9v
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 14:41:03 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:52781)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1bMg8b-0001ax-By
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 14:41:02 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1bMg8S-0000D0-7E
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 14:40:56 -0400
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,RP_MATCHES_RCVD
 autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:51742)
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>)
 id 1bMg8S-0000CL-41; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 14:40:52 -0400
Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:4081
 helo=home-c4e4a596f7)
 by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128)
 (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>)
 id 1bMg8O-00021l-90; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 14:40:50 -0400
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 21:40:16 +0300
Message-Id: <83d1mkc92n.fsf@HIDDEN>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
In-reply-to: <39c015f2-3ebf-43e8-9a37-9b50382042a7@default> (message from Drew
 Adams on Sun, 10 Jul 2016 10:18:27 -0700 (PDT))
References: <<CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>>>
 <83vb0fgu83.fsf@HIDDEN>>>> <<443f2e44-5167-48e7-abc6-cce1e243461e@default>>
 <8337nihpdw.fsf@HIDDEN>>> <<c0dd88c2-51ef-4f4f-964c-f0254db970f7@default>
 <83zipqg3e3.fsf@HIDDEN>> <<871t32ilm0.fsf@HIDDEN>>
 <<83k2gtfue4.fsf@HIDDEN>> <39c015f2-3ebf-43e8-9a37-9b50382042a7@default>
X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic]
X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e
X-Spam-Score: -6.3 (------)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -6.3 (------)

> Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2016 10:18:27 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
> Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> It can sometimes make a lot of sense for a defcustom to use a sexp
> that might not return the same result when reevaluated.

One way to do that while avoiding the issue at hand is to define a
'set' function to do the job, instead of doing it explicitly in the
initialization value.

> The original bug, from which this report is an offshoot, was #4755.
> The example there used this defcustom sexp: `(copy-sequence foo)'.
> 
> And in the context of the using code there is nothing wrong with
> such a sexp: the intention is really to use, as default value, a
> (new) list whose elements are the (exact same) elements as those
> in the list `foo'.

I guess it's crystal-clear now what's wrong with such a sexp.

> The problem is not with being able to make use of such a sexp for
> the default value.  The problem is with how Emacs talks about the
> state of the option value.  It miscommunicates to users.  That's
> what this bug is about: how Emacs talks about what is going on.

Emacs says the truth: the value of the defcustom was changed behind
Customize's back.

And since I've already said all that once before, let's stop going in
circles.  Nothing wrong with agreeing to disagree.

Message sent to bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#23926: defcustom with STANDARD=<non-pure-expression> gives confusing results
Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 18:54:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.23926.B23926.14682631837355 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 23926
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, npostavs@HIDDEN
Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Received: via spool by 23926-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B23926.14682631837355
          (code B ref 23926); Mon, 11 Jul 2016 18:54:02 +0000
Received: (at 23926) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Jul 2016 18:53:03 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47217 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1bMgKF-0001uY-Gb
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 14:53:03 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:54993)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1bMgKD-0001u2-Kr
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 14:53:01 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1bMgK5-0002E6-6P
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 14:52:56 -0400
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,RP_MATCHES_RCVD
 autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:51844)
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>)
 id 1bMgK5-0002Dt-2X; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 14:52:53 -0400
Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:4085
 helo=home-c4e4a596f7)
 by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128)
 (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>)
 id 1bMgK1-0002om-2n; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 14:52:51 -0400
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 21:52:15 +0300
Message-Id: <83bn24c8io.fsf@HIDDEN>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
In-reply-to: <ff33c2cc-337a-433b-a87a-0ea1814311d2@default> (message from Drew
 Adams on Sun, 10 Jul 2016 10:18:29 -0700 (PDT))
References: <<<<CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>>>>
 <<<<83vb0fgu83.fsf@HIDDEN>>>>
 <<<443f2e44-5167-48e7-abc6-cce1e243461e@default>>>
 <<<8337nihpdw.fsf@HIDDEN>>> <<c0dd88c2-51ef-4f4f-964c-f0254db970f7@default>>
 <<83zipqg3e3.fsf@HIDDEN>> <ff33c2cc-337a-433b-a87a-0ea1814311d2@default>
X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic]
X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e
X-Spam-Score: -6.3 (------)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -6.3 (------)

> Date: Sun, 10 Jul 2016 10:18:29 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
> Cc: npostavs@HIDDEN, 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> > > The option value was changed?  I don't think so.
> > 
> > Yes, it was changed, because the value returned by the function
> > changes each time it's called.
> 
> What function?

current-time-string, of course.

> And what occurrence of calling it do you think is responsible for
> this characterization of the value having been changed outside
> Customize?

The second one.

> The fact is that the user did NOT change the value outside
> customize.

The message doesn't say it was the user.  Emacs doesn't know who
changed the value.

> And in fact, the value has NOT been changed.

Of course, it has changed.  Every time current-time-string is called
it returns a different value.  A defcustom's value is evaluated at
least twice, and in this case the second call yields a different
value.  That's why you see the note about changing.

> It is what it was when the defcustom was evaluated.
> 
> The responsible code is `custom-variable-state', specifically
> this part:
> 
> (setq tmp (get symbol 'standard-value))
> (if (condition-case nil
>         (and (equal value (eval (car tmp))) (equal comment nil))
>       (error nil))
>     'standard
>   'changed)
> 
> That tests whether the current value (var VALUE here), which
> in this case came from (default-value 'time), is equal to
> the result of RE-evaluating the defining defcustom sexp,
> (current-time).  And of course it is not equal, because
> time passes...
> 
> The reason it is not unequal is NOT because something has
> changed the option value outside Customize.  The option
> value has not been changed at all.  What "changes" here is
> the result of evaluating the initial sexp.
> 
> IOW, the "changed-outside-Customize" test used is too simplistic.  

No, it isn't.  It does its job.  If you want to avoid the note, if the
note annoys you, don't write such code.

> The code blithely assumes that evaluating what `custom-get'
> returns represents the original value, whereas what it returns
> is the result of RE-evaluating the original sexp.  That is
> precisely the point of this bug.

There's no bug.  This is how this stuff is supposed to work.  I'm not
going to endorse any significant changes there because of such
marginal use cases.

Message sent to bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#23926: defcustom with STANDARD=<non-pure-expression> gives confusing results
Resent-From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 00:55:01 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.23926.B23926.146828485017396 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 23926
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, npostavs@HIDDEN
Received: via spool by 23926-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B23926.146828485017396
          (code B ref 23926); Tue, 12 Jul 2016 00:55:01 +0000
Received: (at 23926) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Jul 2016 00:54:10 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47385 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1bMlxi-0004WV-Lz
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 20:54:10 -0400
Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:35637)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <drew.adams@HIDDEN>) id 1bMlxh-0004WI-NJ
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 20:54:10 -0400
Received: from aserv0021.oracle.com (aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233])
 by aserp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id
 u6C0s3MX022153
 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK);
 Tue, 12 Jul 2016 00:54:04 GMT
Received: from userv0121.oracle.com (userv0121.oracle.com [156.151.31.72])
 by aserv0021.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u6C0s3jj027640
 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK);
 Tue, 12 Jul 2016 00:54:03 GMT
Received: from abhmp0002.oracle.com (abhmp0002.oracle.com [141.146.116.8])
 by userv0121.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u6C0s17W014749;
 Tue, 12 Jul 2016 00:54:02 GMT
MIME-Version: 1.0
Message-ID: <b6126ffb-b956-414d-9dea-fc77cdf5a043@default>
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 17:53:59 -0700 (PDT)
From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@HIDDEN>
References: <<<<<CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>>>>>
 <<<<<83vb0fgu83.fsf@HIDDEN>>>>>
 <<<<443f2e44-5167-48e7-abc6-cce1e243461e@default>>>>
 <<<<8337nihpdw.fsf@HIDDEN>>>>
 <<<c0dd88c2-51ef-4f4f-964c-f0254db970f7@default>>>
 <<<83zipqg3e3.fsf@HIDDEN>>> <<ff33c2cc-337a-433b-a87a-0ea1814311d2@default>>
 <<83bn24c8io.fsf@HIDDEN>>
In-Reply-To: <<83bn24c8io.fsf@HIDDEN>>
X-Priority: 3
X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9  (901082) [OL
 12.0.6744.5000 (x86)]
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Source-IP: aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233]
X-Spam-Score: -3.6 (---)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -3.6 (---)

All I can say is that I disagree.  So be it.

Message sent to bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#23926: defcustom with STANDARD=<non-pure-expression> gives confusing results
Resent-From: npostavs@HIDDEN
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 03:27:01 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.23926.B23926.14682939975578 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 23926
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Received: via spool by 23926-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B23926.14682939975578
          (code B ref 23926); Tue, 12 Jul 2016 03:27:01 +0000
Received: (at 23926) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Jul 2016 03:26:37 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47426 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1bMoLF-0001Ru-58
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 23:26:37 -0400
Received: from mail-io0-f180.google.com ([209.85.223.180]:33492)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <npostavs@HIDDEN>) id 1bMoLB-0001Rf-Kr
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 23:26:35 -0400
Received: by mail-io0-f180.google.com with SMTP id 38so5479901iol.0
 for <23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 11 Jul 2016 20:26:33 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id
 :user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding;
 bh=Q4HtW10QWviEw4JUIjyRC0QVDjGd5CLTm7PsrFDs0xI=;
 b=Zz2SfXO7EXxCaK+KSIeLni/eQKhIf9VAngwmI/mkCg8/FqmN//yVCuDE2me+DPsJpZ
 tWdDYRB5AzuH5rNJtd3y78YCSPGm27m5YL62wgnDKFARHNYhaXVatOi0QFbrStSKoI9s
 aE+8H33GruOLWZcb/29aMH20G46L20cg5JnDB540OzUg2hk7UWmcqRwaO7Lsou7lssN4
 xgU+Zee0J7k4ORD5+xT7zoTQjWjBr69GzRAPqiPCKwdB8OPosOwoJHcQcwOSsqmCY+NA
 dizjSlFi89dZJLnKIw/OSeRjEn2NCli2uC5MTy57hab6lcXzH2AqfkVaP8tYsJvoO1/q
 u3Ng==
X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
 d=1e100.net; s=20130820;
 h=x-gm-message-state:sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date
 :in-reply-to:message-id:user-agent:mime-version
 :content-transfer-encoding;
 bh=Q4HtW10QWviEw4JUIjyRC0QVDjGd5CLTm7PsrFDs0xI=;
 b=FNO9EB0xXoQqqWePtllR022CH52BdHjYJllSi8Z/WjQ5HtgSwYiLEejxRyzdCy6570
 fljI3JxrEcDhsjKKj5Kv0K/ToyA+/ncTdmFO/rOBdhU4Sb8GQl+drVsOYRWPEk+4Ysz+
 Jq0um6n66oL7sxzvkka7uE81ZI/D9Rop7NI7aJ1NXWMsNAlG/vdVt+/otTs+mIs09fNk
 ULsl9RXnzA1AqXbdYaOpsrQror4J5sXROuQ8ROZfJCtwlXuV9A+tUFy1o+w9blLdRLjI
 BSu9yNGGxJOckfmSJNpWbtoFfq0zY0OKOBWlwZoxU2pDHm7K4k8p4OUeJBIEwZn7dHVm
 01/A==
X-Gm-Message-State: ALyK8tJMBmNl/Z0P48zbSdMi6ybpdVImN9J7433YzgIO/F8B3f8YVd97c32Cp0lYnd4FwQ==
X-Received: by 10.107.164.202 with SMTP id d71mr468799ioj.80.1468293988103;
 Mon, 11 Jul 2016 20:26:28 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from zony (206-188-64-44.cpe.distributel.net. [206.188.64.44])
 by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id o15sm10097465ith.2.2016.07.11.20.26.26
 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128);
 Mon, 11 Jul 2016 20:26:27 -0700 (PDT)
From: npostavs@HIDDEN
References: <CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>
 <83vb0fgu83.fsf@HIDDEN> <87k2gvhvql.fsf@HIDDEN>
 <838txbgfgx.fsf@HIDDEN>
 <CAM-tV-80t+zDrp3OPhW36YtQCqWDWCZjc3TQdoj9Aka2TiJEfQ@HIDDEN>
 <837fcvgdho.fsf@HIDDEN>
 <CAM-tV--4-9NVU3BodydvqE_m1VyFUOmstbaXU7fZfdNA-xbj0w@HIDDEN>
 <8360sehps4.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 23:26:25 -0400
In-Reply-To: <8360sehps4.fsf@HIDDEN> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 09 Jul
 2016 17:03:39 +0300")
Message-ID: <87inwbfsf2.fsf@HIDDEN>
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.93 (gnu/linux)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -0.7 (/)

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN> writes:

>> Either really save the original value, or don't call it the "original
>> value". We can't use "default value" because that's already used for
>> the non-buffer local value, unfortunately. I think "standard value"
>> could work, though Drew said it was unclear.
>
> Why change anything in the wording at all?  It won't really change
> what is being done, and won't prevent any confusion, because all this
> "standard", "original", "default" etc. are not well defined anyway.

I had a look at the docs; seems to me "standard" is used consistently,
so it makes sense to change to that.  Docstring of defcustom:

    STANDARD is an expression specifying the variable=E2=80=99s standard
    value.  It should not be quoted.  It is evaluated once by
    =E2=80=98defcustom=E2=80=99, and the value is assigned to SYMBOL if the=
 variable
    is unbound.  The expression itself is also stored, so that
    Customize can re-evaluate it later to get the standard value.
    DOC is the variable documentation.

Elisp manual description of defcustom:

    The argument STANDARD is an expression that specifies the standard
    value for OPTION. ...

    The expression STANDARD can be evaluated at various other times,
    too=E2=80=94whenever the customization facility needs to know OPTION=E2=
=80=99s
    standard value.  So be sure to use an expression which is harmless
    to evaluate at any time.

Message sent to bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:

X-Loop: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
Subject: bug#23926: defcustom with STANDARD=<non-pure-expression> gives confusing results
Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN
Resent-Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 05:21:02 +0000
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.23926.B23926.146830083517937 <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@HIDDEN
X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 23926
X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs
X-GNU-PR-Keywords: 
To: npostavs@HIDDEN
Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
Received: via spool by 23926-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org id=B23926.146830083517937
          (code B ref 23926); Tue, 12 Jul 2016 05:21:02 +0000
Received: (at 23926) by debbugs.gnu.org; 12 Jul 2016 05:20:35 +0000
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47461 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
	by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
	(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
	id 1bMq7W-0004fF-Mc
	for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 01:20:34 -0400
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:41226)
 by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
 (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1bMq7U-0004ez-KM
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 01:20:32 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
 (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>) id 1bMq7M-0005Sp-DK
 for 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 01:20:27 -0400
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.5 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50,RP_MATCHES_RCVD
 autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2
Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:58329)
 by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>)
 id 1bMq7M-0005Sb-AB; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 01:20:24 -0400
Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:4450
 helo=home-c4e4a596f7)
 by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128)
 (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from <eliz@HIDDEN>)
 id 1bMq7K-0001xW-FC; Tue, 12 Jul 2016 01:20:22 -0400
Date: Tue, 12 Jul 2016 08:20:05 +0300
Message-Id: <83y457bfga.fsf@HIDDEN>
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@HIDDEN>
In-reply-to: <87inwbfsf2.fsf@HIDDEN>
 (npostavs@HIDDEN)
References: <CAM-tV-8cG3gLgf-A+wBYPZWNy2WPGFV3uEdNE7=ad3oq4rXmnw@HIDDEN>
 <83vb0fgu83.fsf@HIDDEN> <87k2gvhvql.fsf@HIDDEN>
 <838txbgfgx.fsf@HIDDEN>
 <CAM-tV-80t+zDrp3OPhW36YtQCqWDWCZjc3TQdoj9Aka2TiJEfQ@HIDDEN>
 <837fcvgdho.fsf@HIDDEN>
 <CAM-tV--4-9NVU3BodydvqE_m1VyFUOmstbaXU7fZfdNA-xbj0w@HIDDEN>
 <8360sehps4.fsf@HIDDEN> <87inwbfsf2.fsf@HIDDEN>
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic]
X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e
X-Spam-Score: -6.3 (------)
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, 
 <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -6.3 (------)

> From: npostavs@HIDDEN
> Cc: 23926 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Mon, 11 Jul 2016 23:26:25 -0400
> 
> I had a look at the docs; seems to me "standard" is used consistently,
> so it makes sense to change to that.  Docstring of defcustom:

I'm in favor of using consistent terminology, but this:

>     STANDARD is an expression specifying the variable’s standard
>     value.

is just tautology: it doesn't really explain what is STANDARD, except
by using the same word, which is too general to explain itself.

So if we want to use this, and consider that an improvement, I think
it would be good to explain some more what "standard value" means or
is.

Thanks.

Last modified: Mon, 25 Nov 2019 12:00:02 UTC

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.