bug#19217: 25.0.50; `C-M-x' (`eval-defun') on a `defface' that is not top-level

[Drew Adams]

> > To recap, this allows `C-x C-e' on defvar/defface to work the same as
> > `C-M-x' on those (when they are top-level).
> >
> > That these two work differently is a source of frustration, so I think
> > it makes conceptual sense, but I'm not sure what the repercussions would
> > be otherwise...
> 
> There were no protests, so I've now gone ahead and done this.  This may
> perhaps be controversial, but I've never understood why `C-x C-e'
> shouldn't do "the obvious thing" on defvar (etc) forms, so I've done it
> anyway.
> 
> However, if this somehow gets in the way of people's way of working, it
> could be reversed, I guess.

Thanks for doing this.
But did you also fix `pp-eval-last-sexp'?

You said this:

> Saturday, September 19, 2020 7:11 AM
> > What about `pp-eval-last-sexp'?
> > Could we get that updated similarly?
> 
> Sure, if we decide to alter `eval-last-sexp' in this way.