Re: [External] : Closures - do you understand them well?

[Michael Heerdegen]

Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com> writes:

> You say, "which accidentally happens to be
> the same again in Lisp".  To me it's not an
> accident; it's by design.

Sure it's by design, and it's convenient.

But for readability purposes that doesn't matter that much.

When the reader encounters "()" I expect it to construct an empty list.
That's what I want, so I quote it to get exactly that when that
expression is evaluated.

If we do not limit ourselves to Emacs Lisp, the (not trivial) question
would else be: what is the return value when evaluating an empty list?  Not
trivial because there can be Lisps where an empty list and a boolean
"false" are different (AFAIR such Lisps exist).

So the result of evaluating an empty list could be:

  - an empty list/ the same empty list (self-evaluating)
  - undefined
  - a Boolean value false
  - ...maybe something else?

Because I don't want to tangent this question I prefer to quote the
empty list.

What are your reasons to prefer to evaluate it and use the result?

Michael.