aboutsummaryrefslogtreecommitdiff
path: root/lib
diff options
context:
space:
mode:
authorJonas Bernoulli <jonas@bernoul.li>2021-01-10 15:01:06 +0100
committerDavid Bremner <david@tethera.net>2021-01-15 06:45:30 -0400
commitf47e3333b5478e43840e55710311aebdd441fc0e (patch)
treef6edef3451d1b1122be87a44af75fdd4b49537fc /lib
parent25a8873c68f9ef033d393efaf7f4c46a29f798f4 (diff)
emacs: avoid unnecessary let-bindings
To some extend this is a personal preference, but the preference is strongly dependent on whether one is used to a language that makes it necessary to use variables like this. This makes it perfectly clear that we are first getting and then using a "foo": (use-foo (get-foo)) Sure this has to be read "inside out", but that's something one better gets used to quickly when dealing with lisp. I don't understand why one would want to write this instead: (let ((the-foo (get-foo))) (use-foo the-foo)) Both `get-foo' and `use-foo' are named in a way that make it very clear that we are dealing with a "foo". Storing the value in an additional variable `the-foo' does not make this any more clear. On the contrary I makes the reader wonder why the author choose to use a variable. Is the value used more than once? Is the value being retrieved in one context and then used in another (e.g. when the current buffer changes)?
Diffstat (limited to 'lib')
0 files changed, 0 insertions, 0 deletions