Tim Johnson <tim@akwebsoft.com> writes:
Would it be better to change (nth (+ ndx 1) mylist) to
(function (nth > (+ ndx 1) mylist)) ?
No:
"Like `quote', but preferred for objects which are functions.
In byte compilation, `function' causes its argument to be handled by
the byte compiler. `quote' cannot do that."
"(nth > (+ ndx 1) mylist)" is not a function - it is an
expression that will evaluate to a function. Since `function' acts like
`quote', using this special form would prevent that evaluation, so it
won't work.
The underlying problem is that your expression is evaluated at
run-time. Useful for the compiler would only be a function name known
at compile time. If you know the function name at compile time, you
don't want to eval it at run time, so you want to `quote' anyway.
So what can you do? Since we don't have a multiple-define-key function,
you can just stay with your loop as is - there is nothing wrong with
that, but you'll not get compiler warnings like "unknown function". You
can also use a macro that would expand to a sequence of `define-key'
calls at compile time. Or construct the whole keymap at compile time,
using list functions (or `backquote'). But that's rather uncommon.
Most people just write the key definition calls out or just don't care -
even in the Emacs sources.