From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Michael Heerdegen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#39919: 26.3; Incorrect byte-compiler warning Date: Sun, 08 Mar 2020 01:49:08 +0100 Message-ID: <877dzvk6wr.fsf@web.de> References: <24319F54-ED52-478E-8247-25FA71F27F47@bulsara.com> <87imjihpws.fsf@web.de> <9EC3F872-B2C7-4CAE-8674-6D7EEB4E0AF5@bulsara.com> <87a74uholh.fsf@web.de> <871rq6h2ah.fsf@web.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="92785"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: 39919@debbugs.gnu.org, mike@bulsara.com To: Richard Stallman Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Mar 08 01:50:47 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 1jAk9W-000O45-Ma for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 08 Mar 2020 01:50:46 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53838 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jAk9V-0002VO-Hz for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 07 Mar 2020 19:50:45 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:53214) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jAk8p-0002Hg-NM for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 07 Mar 2020 19:50:04 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jAk8o-0005r9-Oz for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 07 Mar 2020 19:50:03 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:41801) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jAk8o-0005qZ-Lw for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 07 Mar 2020 19:50:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jAk8o-0003uc-Ke for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 07 Mar 2020 19:50:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Michael Heerdegen Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 08 Mar 2020 00:50:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 39919 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 39919-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B39919.158362855314939 (code B ref 39919); Sun, 08 Mar 2020 00:50:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 39919) by debbugs.gnu.org; 8 Mar 2020 00:49:13 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47764 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jAk81-0003st-87 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 07 Mar 2020 19:49:13 -0500 Original-Received: from mout.web.de ([217.72.192.78]:35377) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1jAk7y-0003sf-MR for 39919@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 07 Mar 2020 19:49:11 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=web.de; s=dbaedf251592; t=1583628541; bh=csiK1cOtksxlnJgpMH0ljCLYqME23DDGb8WVjx/+fm4=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To; b=QSxfiUeFit1WB1ygLix8Nkvz8HzGWf6CaFqa+o3CAupFu902BKV2yAKzIzpkNtpFD EH6+QUddSJOwQIuqEtokX6UCIWyVtWIGRILtvU+kdZQdTUSoB8IuJUSRCnu2mVc//X 6PwfwyAJai4pf9n7qLyBfUI8ZNgNZ3ZOc68ori5s= X-UI-Sender-Class: c548c8c5-30a9-4db5-a2e7-cb6cb037b8f9 Original-Received: from drachen.dragon ([92.208.89.41]) by smtp.web.de (mrweb103 [213.165.67.124]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MbyMU-1isX192q2A-00JIWS; Sun, 08 Mar 2020 01:49:01 +0100 In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Fri, 06 Mar 2020 23:23:02 -0500") X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:gGFBt9/cgFd1ql5EqPfW4EqC5EQZHUgUKyFkaABWkUp7p1zlTxr OeGflOAVyjfTO+cw0+QRZzOUHp99CW1DRmFxEONkFSzPjiehalB+7GlN+2Pc8S3qYycJnCG Qx0ah5YY9/Of+p5sg0T3zAUb22U7ejDdKAwx1K8EVRu0lBDIbxb5806lGLawisIh14QTu1J AFMsoDzWVEpAgrp+f3KtQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:GZignmQMx54=:Y+PWUtlg3JYZ9aluUtOQas ZLZLdST8Vy5IFg/DpQ/xxpWqvp2Hf2mMEHxuIL5UTfoy4w4gB4DfiMwP9soz2Qi3XBS/KzBk/ 0j6rOGQ7PSg7uNP+1DOLs/NE/w30j1O7Pks3i4YHzTZkfyCO17sjDxvL30HzgAs05Ui/my8R+ 0pN1ZrWcPalMIBPHhxB0brojFvkUGh/goeGZ6p4L3OBVZIlPGMI9YOK+RCuKn3JYhCp0eQlMB 7IT0oMHcGMbz4NNLyQo9D2UqscYIb8SAOBkZNzr+aS0jhWzQnoU3PmhYxyz7S+FN2wUtu3rVB 4LTP3i9XxT+oMXE9ib3eKBM1JmzC/qfSu2VkAn+/4FOq8ddHU2j0/b49c4i5rRfy7281U1oog bo/dCN6nmDc8/uazAzTg75rErryPRxgtLpgnecvr2Wg8Exo5Ti9iwT5uIBHZFhm7b8geIPDpy dUoSmfVJd/BQqr4aKISxok717Nnlv6mp8PKPh/jToka6t+PY0QBEZjO+oV+//rJgR7H68tkl0 Tb/deMqS2aWl9omCIqSPnTBYzllJkSVBocwXLi0bt6yrZZo3eCY0ySVGlLeM87PM66YLFKFzR 7S7SJ58c7Zq8gchj/a4mHN67bS2ib3cJoD9C1sLNgBU33Wb8bey4LOzePuPMZkALfSclRY9fZ s2xAp6l7nrh0o4QwBofOQXpqgopb5Q2kBbwu4ZKNtD7nkxqTEZrxa1hCW0Cpep06LkiJ9VfLv U+RylT7ntx2j3RlY1EJcN8xHK6PlGyZy85thkKWdlmw1/deApv4p+FX8sLpclIf5FvNkpVQS X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 209.51.188.43 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:177038 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > I can't easily obtain that discussion. Perhaps that discussion > turned up some other reason to deprecated that argument. Yes: the reason was that it's not very useful, the order of execution is strange, and it's easy to avoid, so, to cite Stefan, "Which is why I think the current behavior of complaining when the third field is used (except in the very rare case where the third field refers to the iteration variable) is a fairly good compromise." > But if it was solely to avoid these warnings, I am surprised it is > hard. > > Does this patch fix the problem? Yes, that should work. I don't consider it a good fix because it just hides the underlying problem (I guess that's why the original author added the FIXME instead of fixing it in this obvious way). We have manifestations of the same issue in other places that, AFAIR, can't be fixed in the same way. Anyway, I think the warning currently raised is not helpful, it is confusing if you didn't read the related bug reports. I guess we could just say that the argument is deprecated. Maybe that didn't happen because dotimes in Common Lisp has that third argument too (as mentioned in the other reports). Michael.