From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#44858: [PATCH] Make byte-compiler warn about wide docstrings Date: Sun, 06 Dec 2020 13:19:31 +0200 Message-ID: <834kkzb2rg.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83h7pcqjxy.fsf@gnu.org> <87pn3zjivc.fsf@gnus.org> <831rgfotpg.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="39033"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 44858@debbugs.gnu.org, larsi@gnus.org To: Stefan Kangas Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Dec 06 12:20:24 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kls5X-000A43-GJ for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 06 Dec 2020 12:20:23 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38856 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kls5W-0002QE-HG for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 06 Dec 2020 06:20:22 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:58998) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kls5C-0002AE-0h for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Dec 2020 06:20:02 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:37492) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kls5B-0005Fr-O8 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Dec 2020 06:20:01 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kls5B-00007q-Jg for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Dec 2020 06:20:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 06 Dec 2020 11:20:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 44858 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: patch Original-Received: via spool by 44858-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B44858.1607253593464 (code B ref 44858); Sun, 06 Dec 2020 11:20:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 44858) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Dec 2020 11:19:53 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49038 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kls53-00007Q-Bl for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 06 Dec 2020 06:19:53 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:40730) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kls51-00007B-NN for 44858@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 06 Dec 2020 06:19:52 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:35793) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kls4u-0005AR-KY; Sun, 06 Dec 2020 06:19:45 -0500 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=4355 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1kls4u-0004WA-15; Sun, 06 Dec 2020 06:19:44 -0500 In-Reply-To: (message from Stefan Kangas on Sun, 6 Dec 2020 05:09:45 -0600) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:195080 Archived-At: > From: Stefan Kangas > Date: Sun, 6 Dec 2020 05:09:45 -0600 > Cc: larsi@gnus.org, 44858@debbugs.gnu.org > > Using 3 is not significantly better than 1, as the above numbers show. > But we do risk more false positives. My preference is therefore still > the safer 1, as it will give no false positives. > > We could start with 3 or 1 and adjust later as we learn more about how > this heuristic works in practice. I don't have a very strong opinion, > as I think we will learn more in due time. > > WDYT? Since 3 gives the same number of warnings, and since it covers 3 times as many keys as 1, I prefer to use 3. Thanks.