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#45443: 28.0.50; Can't find definition of compilation--message->loc Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 20:05:24 +0200 Message-ID: <83eejbktuj.fsf@gnu.org> References: > <83a6u0n8y7.fsf@gnu.org>> <83lfdjkuzd.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="1503"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: mardani29@yahoo.es, rms@gnu.org, 45443@debbugs.gnu.org To: Andrea Corallo Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Dec 27 19:07:09 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 1ktaRh-0000Jq-Ef for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 27 Dec 2020 19:07:09 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:43936 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ktaRg-0006KB-Do for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 27 Dec 2020 13:07:08 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:55586) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ktaRa-0006K4-W0 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Dec 2020 13:07:02 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:50183) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ktaRa-00038n-O3 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Dec 2020 13:07:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ktaRa-0007tc-GJ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Dec 2020 13:07:02 -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, 27 Dec 2020 18:07:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 45443 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: fixed Original-Received: via spool by 45443-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B45443.160909238730312 (code B ref 45443); Sun, 27 Dec 2020 18:07:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 45443) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Dec 2020 18:06:27 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33496 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ktaR1-0007sq-Dw for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Dec 2020 13:06:27 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:34142) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ktaQz-0007sc-U5 for 45443@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 27 Dec 2020 13:06:26 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:52588) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ktaQu-00036X-FE; Sun, 27 Dec 2020 13:06:20 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:1093 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1ktaQC-0002Ow-I5; Sun, 27 Dec 2020 13:06:00 -0500 In-Reply-To: (message from Andrea Corallo on Sun, 27 Dec 2020 17:59:09 +0000) 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:196813 Archived-At: > From: Andrea Corallo > Cc: Daniel Martín , rms@gnu.org, > 45443@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2020 17:59:09 +0000 > > > Why do we need to expand macros? isn't it enough to find the defstruct > > itself, by looking for a partial match? > > I haven't look at the patch, but I think the approach of macro expanding > is more general as should be able to track any function definition that > is synthesized by any macro. It is also more expensive and complicated.