New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Use fboundp and functionp correctly for great good #1336

Merged
merged 1 commit into from Nov 29, 2017

Conversation

Projects
None yet
2 participants
@basil-conto
Contributor

basil-conto commented Nov 29, 2017

Changelog

  • counsel.el (counsel-el): Simplify predicate to fboundp.
  • ivy.el (ivy-completion-in-region-action): Use fboundp to make
    feature detection more robust while silencing byte-compiler.
    (ivy-switch-buffer): Commands must satisfy functionp, not fboundp.

Question

(or (functionp x)
    (macrop x)
    (special-form-p x))

Is there some edge case where this is not equivalent to fboundp, at least for our intentions?

Use fboundp and functionp correctly for great good
* counsel.el (counsel-el): Simplify predicate to fboundp.
* ivy.el (ivy-completion-in-region-action): Use fboundp to make
feature detection more robust while silencing byte-compiler.
(ivy-switch-buffer): Commands must satisfy functionp, not fboundp.

@abo-abo abo-abo merged commit 2393540 into abo-abo:master Nov 29, 2017

1 check passed

continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details
@abo-abo

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@abo-abo

abo-abo Nov 29, 2017

Owner

Is there some edge case where this is not equivalent to fboundp, at least for our intentions?

Probably not.

Owner

abo-abo commented Nov 29, 2017

Is there some edge case where this is not equivalent to fboundp, at least for our intentions?

Probably not.

@basil-conto basil-conto deleted the basil-conto:fboundp branch Dec 5, 2017

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment