Both seem to work equally well when mapping a function over a list, for example.
(mapcar #'1+ (list 1 2 3)) ;; => (2 3 4) (mapcar '1+ (list 1 2 3)) ;; => (2 3 4)
Emacs Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for those using, extending or developing Emacs. It only takes a minute to sign up.Sign up to join this community
function) is more verbose than
quote), and it provides three practical benefits.
Byte compile a file which contains the following code
(mapc #'2+ nil) (mapc '3+ nil)
The byte compiler will warns us that
2+ is not defined:
foo.el:3:1:Warning: the function `2+' is not known to be defined.
3+ is also not defined, we won't get a warning because we're using
For example, when I see this two function calls, I will get more precise information
(foo #'bar) ;; => foo accepts a function and bar is a function (foo 'bar) ;; => foo accepts a symbol
#' completes only symbols with a function definition while
' completes any symbols (functions/variables/faces etc).
') returns its argument sexp - any Lisp object (thing).
#') returns its argument sexp as a function object. This also means that in code you byte-compile it tells the byte compiler that that thing is a function.
'foobar just evaluates to the symbol
#'foobar evaluates to a function.
'(lambda) () (something)) evaluates to the list whose car is the symbol
lambda, whose cadr is
nil, and whose caddr is the list
(something). There is no way for the byte-compiler or any code that uses this return value to know that that list is to be interpreted/used as a function (except code that in fact uses it that way).
#'(lambda () (something)) evaluates to a function that accepts no arguments and invokes function
something (passing it no args). (
(lambda () (something) evaluates to the same function - unquoted
lambda forms are self-evaluating.)
In Lisp, data and code (programs) have the same syntax.
(lambda () (something) is both a list (when not evaluated) and a function (when evaluated). When you quote such a list,
'(lambda () (something)), you get just that list, not a function.
If you then use that list as a function, it works, because when evaluated it is interpreted as a lambda form, which returns an anonymous function (which can have the same form as the lambda form itself).
When Emacs - in particular the byte compiler - can know that some bit of code is a function it can act accordingly, error-check, optimize, etc. If all Emacs knows is that there is a list whose car is the symbol
lambda etc., there's no way it can or should make any assumption about it representing a function. The code in which it occurs could use it in some other way.