GNU bug report logs - #79247
31.0.50; cond* bind* clause body

Previous Next

To reply to this bug, email your comments to 79247 AT debbugs.gnu.org.

Toggle the display of automated, internal messages from the tracker.

Message #5 received at submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Lester Longley <lester <at> ieee.org>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: 31.0.50; cond* bind* clause body
Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2025 14:49:56 -0400

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hello,

I don't know that the below represents a bug, but it might...
(Please advise if I should instead send this to emacs-devel <at> gnu.org)

I haven't been able to locate any examples of using bind* with a clause
body.
(I also checked lisp/emacs-lisp/cond-star-tests.el.)

Based on Trevor's example in
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2025-01/msg00312.html, I
tried (emacs -Q):

(cond*
 ((bind* (foo 1))
  (message "bound"))
 (t :nothing))

This returns :nothing, as expected, since bind* is non-exiting,
but I had also expected (hoped) to--but didn't--see the message "bound" in
the Messages buffer,
through execution of the clause body "(message "bound")"
since I believe that the condition "(bind* (foo 1))" should be true,
as per "As a condition, it counts as true if the first binding’s value is
non-‘nil’."
in the following excerpt from "(elisp) cond* Macro":

 -- Macro: cond* &rest clauses
     The ‘cond*’ macro is an extended form of the traditional ‘cond’.  A
     ‘cond*’ expression contains a series of CLAUSES, each of which can
     use ‘bind*’ to specify binding variables, use ‘match*’ to specify
     matching a pattern as a condition, or specify an expression as a
     condition to evaluate as a test.

     Each clause normally has the form ‘(CONDITION BODY...)’.

     CONDITION can be a Lisp expression, as in ‘cond’ (*note
     Conditionals::).  Or it can be ‘(bind* BINDINGS...)’ or
     ‘(match* PATTERN DATUM)’.

     ‘(bind* BINDINGS...)’ means to bind BINDINGS (like the bindings
     list in ‘let*’, *note Local Variables::) for the body of the
     clause.  As a condition, it counts as true if the first binding’s
     value is non-‘nil’.

I believe this result means that the clause "body" didn't execute, even
though the corresponding "condition" is (should be) true.

Thanks,
Lester

In GNU Emacs 31.0.50 (build 1, x86_64-pc-linux-gnu, GTK+ Version
 3.24.38, cairo version 1.16.0) of 2025-08-11 built on penguin
Repository revision: 66eead6fd06d40b919ee6d1de86099592729d671
Repository branch: master
System Description: Debian GNU/Linux 12 (bookworm)

Configured using:
 'configure --with-pgtk 'CFLAGS=-g -O2
 -ffile-prefix-map=/tmp/emacs.git=. -fstack-protector-strong -Wformat
 -Werror=format-security -Wall' 'CPPFLAGS=-Wdate-time
 -D_FORTIFY_SOURCE=2' LDFLAGS=-Wl,-z,relro'

Configured features:
ACL CAIRO DBUS FREETYPE GIF GLIB GMP GNUTLS GPM GSETTINGS HARFBUZZ JPEG
LCMS2 LIBOTF LIBSELINUX LIBSYSTEMD LIBXML2 MODULES NATIVE_COMP NOTIFY
INOTIFY PDUMPER PGTK PNG RSVG SECCOMP SOUND THREADS TIFF
TOOLKIT_SCROLL_BARS TREE_SITTER WEBP XIM GTK3 ZLIB

Important settings:
  value of $LANG: en_US.UTF-8
  locale-coding-system: utf-8-unix

Major mode: Lisp Interaction

Minor modes in effect:
  tooltip-mode: t
  global-eldoc-mode: t
  eldoc-mode: t
  show-paren-mode: t
  electric-indent-mode: t
  mouse-wheel-mode: t
  tool-bar-mode: t
  menu-bar-mode: t
  file-name-shadow-mode: t
  global-font-lock-mode: t
  font-lock-mode: t
  blink-cursor-mode: t
  minibuffer-regexp-mode: t
  line-number-mode: t
  indent-tabs-mode: t
  transient-mark-mode: t
  auto-composition-mode: t
  auto-encryption-mode: t
  auto-compression-mode: t

Load-path shadows:
None found.

Features:
(shadow sort mail-extr compile comint ansi-osc ansi-color ring comp-run
bytecomp byte-compile comp-common rx emacsbug lisp-mnt message mailcap
yank-media puny dired dired-loaddefs rfc822 mml mml-sec password-cache
epa derived epg rfc6068 epg-config gnus-util text-property-search
time-date subr-x mm-decode mm-bodies mm-encode mail-parse rfc2231
mailabbrev gmm-utils mailheader cl-loaddefs cl-lib sendmail rfc2047
rfc2045 ietf-drums mm-util mail-prsvr mail-utils rmc iso-transl tooltip
cconv eldoc paren electric uniquify ediff-hook vc-hooks lisp-float-type
elisp-mode mwheel term/pgtk-win pgtk-win term/common-win touch-screen
pgtk-dnd tool-bar dnd fontset image regexp-opt fringe tabulated-list
replace newcomment text-mode lisp-mode prog-mode register page tab-bar
menu-bar rfn-eshadow isearch easymenu timer select scroll-bar mouse
jit-lock font-lock syntax font-core term/tty-colors frame minibuffer
nadvice seq simple cl-generic indonesian philippine cham georgian
utf-8-lang misc-lang vietnamese tibetan thai tai-viet lao korean
japanese eucjp-ms cp51932 hebrew greek romanian slovak czech european
ethiopic indian cyrillic chinese composite emoji-zwj charscript charprop
case-table epa-hook jka-cmpr-hook help abbrev obarray oclosure
cl-preloaded button loaddefs theme-loaddefs faces cus-face macroexp
files window text-properties overlay sha1 md5 base64 format env
code-pages mule custom widget keymap hashtable-print-readable backquote
threads dbusbind inotify dynamic-setting system-font-setting
font-render-setting cairo gtk pgtk lcms2 multi-tty move-toolbar
make-network-process tty-child-frames native-compile emacs)

Memory information:
((conses 16 66922 14238) (symbols 48 6803 0) (strings 32 17289 2551)
 (string-bytes 1 550776) (vectors 16 11399)
 (vector-slots 8 154109 11674) (floats 8 22 13) (intervals 56 252 0)
 (buffers 1064 11))

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Message #8 received at 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Lester Longley <lester <at> ieee.org>, Richard Stallman <rms <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#79247: 31.0.50; cond* bind* clause body
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2025 12:50:13 +0300

> Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2025 14:49:56 -0400
> From:  Lester Longley via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
>  the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
> 
> I don't know that the below represents a bug, but it might...
> (Please advise if I should instead send this to emacs-devel <at> gnu.org)
> 
> I haven't been able to locate any examples of using bind* with a clause body.
> (I also checked lisp/emacs-lisp/cond-star-tests.el.)
> 
> Based on Trevor's example in https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2025-01/msg00312.html, I tried
> (emacs -Q):
> 
> (cond*
>  ((bind* (foo 1))
>   (message "bound"))
>  (t :nothing))
> 
> This returns :nothing, as expected, since bind* is non-exiting,
> but I had also expected (hoped) to--but didn't--see the message "bound" in the Messages buffer,
> through execution of the clause body "(message "bound")"
> since I believe that the condition "(bind* (foo 1))" should be true,
> as per "As a condition, it counts as true if the first binding’s value is non-‘nil’."
> in the following excerpt from "(elisp) cond* Macro":
> 
>  -- Macro: cond* &rest clauses
>      The ‘cond*’ macro is an extended form of the traditional ‘cond’.  A
>      ‘cond*’ expression contains a series of CLAUSES, each of which can
>      use ‘bind*’ to specify binding variables, use ‘match*’ to specify
>      matching a pattern as a condition, or specify an expression as a
>      condition to evaluate as a test.
> 
>      Each clause normally has the form ‘(CONDITION BODY...)’.
> 
>      CONDITION can be a Lisp expression, as in ‘cond’ (*note
>      Conditionals::).  Or it can be ‘(bind* BINDINGS...)’ or
>      ‘(match* PATTERN DATUM)’.
> 
>      ‘(bind* BINDINGS...)’ means to bind BINDINGS (like the bindings
>      list in ‘let*’, *note Local Variables::) for the body of the
>      clause.  As a condition, it counts as true if the first binding’s
>      value is non-‘nil’.
> 
> I believe this result means that the clause "body" didn't execute, even though the corresponding "condition"
> is (should be) true.

Richard, could you please look into this?

Message #11 received at 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Richard Stallman <rms <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, lester <at> ieee.org
Subject: Re: bug#79247: 31.0.50; cond* bind* clause body
Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2025 10:55:58 +0300

Ping!  Richard, could you please look into this issue?

> Cc: 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2025 12:50:13 +0300
> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
> 
> > Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2025 14:49:56 -0400
> > From:  Lester Longley via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
> >  the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
> > 
> > I don't know that the below represents a bug, but it might...
> > (Please advise if I should instead send this to emacs-devel <at> gnu.org)
> > 
> > I haven't been able to locate any examples of using bind* with a clause body.
> > (I also checked lisp/emacs-lisp/cond-star-tests.el.)
> > 
> > Based on Trevor's example in https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2025-01/msg00312.html, I tried
> > (emacs -Q):
> > 
> > (cond*
> >  ((bind* (foo 1))
> >   (message "bound"))
> >  (t :nothing))
> > 
> > This returns :nothing, as expected, since bind* is non-exiting,
> > but I had also expected (hoped) to--but didn't--see the message "bound" in the Messages buffer,
> > through execution of the clause body "(message "bound")"
> > since I believe that the condition "(bind* (foo 1))" should be true,
> > as per "As a condition, it counts as true if the first binding’s value is non-‘nil’."
> > in the following excerpt from "(elisp) cond* Macro":
> > 
> >  -- Macro: cond* &rest clauses
> >      The ‘cond*’ macro is an extended form of the traditional ‘cond’.  A
> >      ‘cond*’ expression contains a series of CLAUSES, each of which can
> >      use ‘bind*’ to specify binding variables, use ‘match*’ to specify
> >      matching a pattern as a condition, or specify an expression as a
> >      condition to evaluate as a test.
> > 
> >      Each clause normally has the form ‘(CONDITION BODY...)’.
> > 
> >      CONDITION can be a Lisp expression, as in ‘cond’ (*note
> >      Conditionals::).  Or it can be ‘(bind* BINDINGS...)’ or
> >      ‘(match* PATTERN DATUM)’.
> > 
> >      ‘(bind* BINDINGS...)’ means to bind BINDINGS (like the bindings
> >      list in ‘let*’, *note Local Variables::) for the body of the
> >      clause.  As a condition, it counts as true if the first binding’s
> >      value is non-‘nil’.
> > 
> > I believe this result means that the clause "body" didn't execute, even though the corresponding "condition"
> > is (should be) true.
> 
> Richard, could you please look into this?
> 
> 
> 
> 

Message #14 received at 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: rms <at> gnu.org
Cc: 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, lester <at> ieee.org
Subject: Re: bug#79247: 31.0.50; cond* bind* clause body
Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2025 10:48:23 +0300

Ping! Ping!  Richard, could you please respond?

> Cc: 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, lester <at> ieee.org
> Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2025 10:55:58 +0300
> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
> 
> Ping!  Richard, could you please look into this issue?
> 
> > Cc: 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> > Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2025 12:50:13 +0300
> > From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
> > 
> > > Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2025 14:49:56 -0400
> > > From:  Lester Longley via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
> > >  the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
> > > 
> > > I don't know that the below represents a bug, but it might...
> > > (Please advise if I should instead send this to emacs-devel <at> gnu.org)
> > > 
> > > I haven't been able to locate any examples of using bind* with a clause body.
> > > (I also checked lisp/emacs-lisp/cond-star-tests.el.)
> > > 
> > > Based on Trevor's example in https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2025-01/msg00312.html, I tried
> > > (emacs -Q):
> > > 
> > > (cond*
> > >  ((bind* (foo 1))
> > >   (message "bound"))
> > >  (t :nothing))
> > > 
> > > This returns :nothing, as expected, since bind* is non-exiting,
> > > but I had also expected (hoped) to--but didn't--see the message "bound" in the Messages buffer,
> > > through execution of the clause body "(message "bound")"
> > > since I believe that the condition "(bind* (foo 1))" should be true,
> > > as per "As a condition, it counts as true if the first binding’s value is non-‘nil’."
> > > in the following excerpt from "(elisp) cond* Macro":
> > > 
> > >  -- Macro: cond* &rest clauses
> > >      The ‘cond*’ macro is an extended form of the traditional ‘cond’.  A
> > >      ‘cond*’ expression contains a series of CLAUSES, each of which can
> > >      use ‘bind*’ to specify binding variables, use ‘match*’ to specify
> > >      matching a pattern as a condition, or specify an expression as a
> > >      condition to evaluate as a test.
> > > 
> > >      Each clause normally has the form ‘(CONDITION BODY...)’.
> > > 
> > >      CONDITION can be a Lisp expression, as in ‘cond’ (*note
> > >      Conditionals::).  Or it can be ‘(bind* BINDINGS...)’ or
> > >      ‘(match* PATTERN DATUM)’.
> > > 
> > >      ‘(bind* BINDINGS...)’ means to bind BINDINGS (like the bindings
> > >      list in ‘let*’, *note Local Variables::) for the body of the
> > >      clause.  As a condition, it counts as true if the first binding’s
> > >      value is non-‘nil’.
> > > 
> > > I believe this result means that the clause "body" didn't execute, even though the corresponding "condition"
> > > is (should be) true.
> > 
> > Richard, could you please look into this?
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Message #17 received at 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Lester Longley <lester <at> ieee.org>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, rms <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#79247: 31.0.50; cond* bind* clause body
Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2025 09:35:03 -0400

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

In case it is helpful, I find that the attached change addresses the
original issue (which I posited).

The change is similar to (motivated by) that in commit f3ef16f86ff,
though it doesn't go as far as the change (to
`cond*-non-exit-clause-p') in that commit,
since I'm unsure whether "Don't check for keywords" should also be
applied to `cond*-non-exit-clause-substance'.

Regards,
Lester

On Sat, Sep 13, 2025 at 3:48 AM Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:
>
> Ping! Ping!  Richard, could you please respond?
>
> > Cc: 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, lester <at> ieee.org
> > Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2025 10:55:58 +0300
> > From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
> >
> > Ping!  Richard, could you please look into this issue?
> >
> > > Cc: 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> > > Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2025 12:50:13 +0300
> > > From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
> > >
> > > > Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2025 14:49:56 -0400
> > > > From:  Lester Longley via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
> > > >  the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
> > > >
> > > > I don't know that the below represents a bug, but it might...
> > > > (Please advise if I should instead send this to emacs-devel <at> gnu.org)
> > > >
> > > > I haven't been able to locate any examples of using bind* with a clause body.
> > > > (I also checked lisp/emacs-lisp/cond-star-tests.el.)
> > > >
> > > > Based on Trevor's example in https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2025-01/msg00312.html, I tried
> > > > (emacs -Q):
> > > >
> > > > (cond*
> > > >  ((bind* (foo 1))
> > > >   (message "bound"))
> > > >  (t :nothing))
> > > >
> > > > This returns :nothing, as expected, since bind* is non-exiting,
> > > > but I had also expected (hoped) to--but didn't--see the message "bound" in the Messages buffer,
> > > > through execution of the clause body "(message "bound")"
> > > > since I believe that the condition "(bind* (foo 1))" should be true,
> > > > as per "As a condition, it counts as true if the first binding’s value is non-‘nil’."
> > > > in the following excerpt from "(elisp) cond* Macro":
> > > >
> > > >  -- Macro: cond* &rest clauses
> > > >      The ‘cond*’ macro is an extended form of the traditional ‘cond’.  A
> > > >      ‘cond*’ expression contains a series of CLAUSES, each of which can
> > > >      use ‘bind*’ to specify binding variables, use ‘match*’ to specify
> > > >      matching a pattern as a condition, or specify an expression as a
> > > >      condition to evaluate as a test.
> > > >
> > > >      Each clause normally has the form ‘(CONDITION BODY...)’.
> > > >
> > > >      CONDITION can be a Lisp expression, as in ‘cond’ (*note
> > > >      Conditionals::).  Or it can be ‘(bind* BINDINGS...)’ or
> > > >      ‘(match* PATTERN DATUM)’.
> > > >
> > > >      ‘(bind* BINDINGS...)’ means to bind BINDINGS (like the bindings
> > > >      list in ‘let*’, *note Local Variables::) for the body of the
> > > >      clause.  As a condition, it counts as true if the first binding’s
> > > >      value is non-‘nil’.
> > > >
> > > > I believe this result means that the clause "body" didn't execute, even though the corresponding "condition"
> > > > is (should be) true.
> > >
> > > Richard, could you please look into this?
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >

[cond-star.diff (application/octet-stream, attachment)]

Message #20 received at 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: rms <at> gnu.org
Cc: 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, lester <at> ieee.org
Subject: Re: bug#79247: 31.0.50; cond* bind* clause body
Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2025 11:52:04 +0300

Ping! Ping! Ping!  Richard, could you please chime in?

> Cc: 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, lester <at> ieee.org
> Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2025 10:48:23 +0300
> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
> 
> Ping! Ping!  Richard, could you please respond?
> 
> > Cc: 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, lester <at> ieee.org
> > Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2025 10:55:58 +0300
> > From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
> > 
> > Ping!  Richard, could you please look into this issue?
> > 
> > > Cc: 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> > > Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2025 12:50:13 +0300
> > > From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
> > > 
> > > > Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2025 14:49:56 -0400
> > > > From:  Lester Longley via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
> > > >  the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
> > > > 
> > > > I don't know that the below represents a bug, but it might...
> > > > (Please advise if I should instead send this to emacs-devel <at> gnu.org)
> > > > 
> > > > I haven't been able to locate any examples of using bind* with a clause body.
> > > > (I also checked lisp/emacs-lisp/cond-star-tests.el.)
> > > > 
> > > > Based on Trevor's example in https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2025-01/msg00312.html, I tried
> > > > (emacs -Q):
> > > > 
> > > > (cond*
> > > >  ((bind* (foo 1))
> > > >   (message "bound"))
> > > >  (t :nothing))
> > > > 
> > > > This returns :nothing, as expected, since bind* is non-exiting,
> > > > but I had also expected (hoped) to--but didn't--see the message "bound" in the Messages buffer,
> > > > through execution of the clause body "(message "bound")"
> > > > since I believe that the condition "(bind* (foo 1))" should be true,
> > > > as per "As a condition, it counts as true if the first binding’s value is non-‘nil’."
> > > > in the following excerpt from "(elisp) cond* Macro":
> > > > 
> > > >  -- Macro: cond* &rest clauses
> > > >      The ‘cond*’ macro is an extended form of the traditional ‘cond’.  A
> > > >      ‘cond*’ expression contains a series of CLAUSES, each of which can
> > > >      use ‘bind*’ to specify binding variables, use ‘match*’ to specify
> > > >      matching a pattern as a condition, or specify an expression as a
> > > >      condition to evaluate as a test.
> > > > 
> > > >      Each clause normally has the form ‘(CONDITION BODY...)’.
> > > > 
> > > >      CONDITION can be a Lisp expression, as in ‘cond’ (*note
> > > >      Conditionals::).  Or it can be ‘(bind* BINDINGS...)’ or
> > > >      ‘(match* PATTERN DATUM)’.
> > > > 
> > > >      ‘(bind* BINDINGS...)’ means to bind BINDINGS (like the bindings
> > > >      list in ‘let*’, *note Local Variables::) for the body of the
> > > >      clause.  As a condition, it counts as true if the first binding’s
> > > >      value is non-‘nil’.
> > > > 
> > > > I believe this result means that the clause "body" didn't execute, even though the corresponding "condition"
> > > > is (should be) true.
> > > 
> > > Richard, could you please look into this?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Message #23 received at 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: rms <at> gnu.org
Cc: 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, lester <at> ieee.org
Subject: Re: bug#79247: 31.0.50; cond* bind* clause body
Date: Sat, 11 Oct 2025 11:28:50 +0300

Ping! Ping! Ping! Ping!  Richard, please respond.

> Cc: 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, lester <at> ieee.org
> Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2025 11:52:04 +0300
> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
> 
> Ping! Ping! Ping!  Richard, could you please chime in?
> 
> > Cc: 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, lester <at> ieee.org
> > Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2025 10:48:23 +0300
> > From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
> > 
> > Ping! Ping!  Richard, could you please respond?
> > 
> > > Cc: 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, lester <at> ieee.org
> > > Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2025 10:55:58 +0300
> > > From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
> > > 
> > > Ping!  Richard, could you please look into this issue?
> > > 
> > > > Cc: 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> > > > Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2025 12:50:13 +0300
> > > > From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
> > > > 
> > > > > Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2025 14:49:56 -0400
> > > > > From:  Lester Longley via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
> > > > >  the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
> > > > > 
> > > > > I don't know that the below represents a bug, but it might...
> > > > > (Please advise if I should instead send this to emacs-devel <at> gnu.org)
> > > > > 
> > > > > I haven't been able to locate any examples of using bind* with a clause body.
> > > > > (I also checked lisp/emacs-lisp/cond-star-tests.el.)
> > > > > 
> > > > > Based on Trevor's example in https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2025-01/msg00312.html, I tried
> > > > > (emacs -Q):
> > > > > 
> > > > > (cond*
> > > > >  ((bind* (foo 1))
> > > > >   (message "bound"))
> > > > >  (t :nothing))
> > > > > 
> > > > > This returns :nothing, as expected, since bind* is non-exiting,
> > > > > but I had also expected (hoped) to--but didn't--see the message "bound" in the Messages buffer,
> > > > > through execution of the clause body "(message "bound")"
> > > > > since I believe that the condition "(bind* (foo 1))" should be true,
> > > > > as per "As a condition, it counts as true if the first binding’s value is non-‘nil’."
> > > > > in the following excerpt from "(elisp) cond* Macro":
> > > > > 
> > > > >  -- Macro: cond* &rest clauses
> > > > >      The ‘cond*’ macro is an extended form of the traditional ‘cond’.  A
> > > > >      ‘cond*’ expression contains a series of CLAUSES, each of which can
> > > > >      use ‘bind*’ to specify binding variables, use ‘match*’ to specify
> > > > >      matching a pattern as a condition, or specify an expression as a
> > > > >      condition to evaluate as a test.
> > > > > 
> > > > >      Each clause normally has the form ‘(CONDITION BODY...)’.
> > > > > 
> > > > >      CONDITION can be a Lisp expression, as in ‘cond’ (*note
> > > > >      Conditionals::).  Or it can be ‘(bind* BINDINGS...)’ or
> > > > >      ‘(match* PATTERN DATUM)’.
> > > > > 
> > > > >      ‘(bind* BINDINGS...)’ means to bind BINDINGS (like the bindings
> > > > >      list in ‘let*’, *note Local Variables::) for the body of the
> > > > >      clause.  As a condition, it counts as true if the first binding’s
> > > > >      value is non-‘nil’.
> > > > > 
> > > > > I believe this result means that the clause "body" didn't execute, even though the corresponding "condition"
> > > > > is (should be) true.
> > > > 
> > > > Richard, could you please look into this?
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> 
> 
> 
> 

Message #26 received at 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Lester Longley <lester <at> ieee.org>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, rms <at> gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#79247: 31.0.50; cond* bind* clause body
Date: Tue, 4 Nov 2025 07:55:41 -0500

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Hi Eli,

Richard clarified yesterday, in [[
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2025-11/msg00103.html][Re:
Adding bind-and* to cond*]]

> > `(bind* BINDINGS...)' means to bind BINDINGS (as if they were in `let*')
> > for the body of the clause, and all subsequent clauses, since the
`bind*'
> > clause is always a non-exit clause.  As a condition, it counts as true
> > and runs the body of the clause if the first binding's value is non-nil.
>
> That describes the meaning it is supposed to have.  If the code
> disagrees with that, the code should be fixed.

I believe that the patch (cond-star.diff) which I had sent earlier in this
thread (9/15/25) would correct,
or at least be helpful towards "fixing," the operation of `bind*' as
regards this particular issue.

Regards,
Lester

On Sat, Oct 11, 2025 at 4:29 AM Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:
> Ping! Ping! Ping! Ping!  Richard, please respond.
>
> Cc: 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, lester <at> ieee.org
> Date: Sat, 27 Sep 2025 11:52:04 +0300
> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
>
> Ping! Ping! Ping!  Richard, could you please chime in?
>
> > Cc: 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, lester <at> ieee.org
> > Date: Sat, 13 Sep 2025 10:48:23 +0300
> > From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
> >
> > Ping! Ping!  Richard, could you please respond?
> >
> > > Cc: 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, lester <at> ieee.org
> > > Date: Sat, 30 Aug 2025 10:55:58 +0300
> > > From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
> > >
> > > Ping!  Richard, could you please look into this issue?
> > >
> > > > Cc: 79247 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> > > > Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2025 12:50:13 +0300
> > > > From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
> > > >
> > > > > Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2025 14:49:56 -0400
> > > > > From:  Lester Longley via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
> > > > >  the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org>
> > > > >
> > > > > I don't know that the below represents a bug, but it might...
> > > > > (Please advise if I should instead send this to
emacs-devel <at> gnu.org)
> > > > >
> > > > > I haven't been able to locate any examples of using bind* with a
clause body.
> > > > > (I also checked lisp/emacs-lisp/cond-star-tests.el.)
> > > > >
> > > > > Based on Trevor's example in
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2025-01/msg00312.html, I
tried
> > > > > (emacs -Q):
> > > > >
> > > > > (cond*
> > > > >  ((bind* (foo 1))
> > > > >   (message "bound"))
> > > > >  (t :nothing))
> > > > >
> > > > > This returns :nothing, as expected, since bind* is non-exiting,
> > > > > but I had also expected (hoped) to--but didn't--see the message
"bound" in the Messages buffer,
> > > > > through execution of the clause body "(message "bound")"
> > > > > since I believe that the condition "(bind* (foo 1))" should be
true,
> > > > > as per "As a condition, it counts as true if the first binding’s
value is non-‘nil’."
> > > > > in the following excerpt from "(elisp) cond* Macro":
> > > > >
> > > > >  -- Macro: cond* &rest clauses
> > > > >      The ‘cond*’ macro is an extended form of the traditional
‘cond’.  A
> > > > >      ‘cond*’ expression contains a series of CLAUSES, each of
which can
> > > > >      use ‘bind*’ to specify binding variables, use ‘match*’ to
specify
> > > > >      matching a pattern as a condition, or specify an expression
as a
> > > > >      condition to evaluate as a test.
> > > > >
> > > > >      Each clause normally has the form ‘(CONDITION BODY...)’.
> > > > >
> > > > >      CONDITION can be a Lisp expression, as in ‘cond’ (*note
> > > > >      Conditionals::).  Or it can be ‘(bind* BINDINGS...)’ or
> > > > >      ‘(match* PATTERN DATUM)’.
> > > > >
> > > > >      ‘(bind* BINDINGS...)’ means to bind BINDINGS (like the
bindings
> > > > >      list in ‘let*’, *note Local Variables::) for the body of the
> > > > >      clause.  As a condition, it counts as true if the first
binding’s
> > > > >      value is non-‘nil’.
> > > > >
> > > > > I believe this result means that the clause "body" didn't
execute, even though the corresponding "condition"
> > > > > is (should be) true.
> > > >
> > > > Richard, could you please look into this?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>
>

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.