[slime-devel] [RfC] call-with-foo indentation magic

[Tobias C Rittweiler]

In article <m239u98tqd.fsf at common-lisp.net>,
 Helmut Eller <heller at common-lisp.net> wrote:

> * Tobias C Rittweiler [2010-08-20 08:21] writes:
> 
> > I'd like to have a function
> >
> >   (defun call-with-foo (a b function) ...)
> >
> > be indented like
> >
> >   (call-with-foo (foo 1 2 3)
> >                  (bar 9 8 7)
> >     #'(lambda (x)
> >          ...))
> 
> Still very verbose: call-with- + lambda, or in your case
> call-with- + #' + lambda, is a lot of noise.
> Seems like a bad idiom to me.  

It's less noisy than writing the LET+UWP directly that
usually is what CALL-WITH boils down to.

I usually refactor from LET+UWP into CALL-WITH, not
thinking much about the interface, and only when I made
up an opinion about the interface I go to a WITH- macro.


> > I'm tempted to change SWANK indentation update code to recognize
> > and treat specially functions starting with CALL-WITH,
> > and having a last parameter named FUNCTION or CONTINUATION.
> >
> > I could see people not wanting it, so let me ask
> > what you guys think. Should this be default behaviour,
> > go to a contrib, or should I be damned for raising the
> > question?
> 
> I don't want that as default. 

Noted.

  -T.