bug#48025: 28.0.50; Add an invocation option to inhibit native-compilation functionality

[Andrea Corallo via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> Cc: 48025@debbugs.gnu.org
>> From: Phil Sainty <psainty@orcon.net.nz>
>> Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2021 16:28:24 +1200
>> 
>> >> But frankly, I would hesitate to complicate Emacs even for the latter
>> >> possibility.  What you ask for doesn't seem to be a user-level
>> >> feature, it is mainly important for Emacs developers, and those can
>> >> always build 2 separate binaries (e.g., I already did).  Building a
>> >> differently-configured Emacs, even from the same Git repository, is so
>> >> easy that I don't really see a justification for a feature like you
>> >> describe.
>> 
>> I guess time will tell.  My feeling was that if end users encounter
>> native-comp bugs that are not trivial for the maintainers to reproduce
>> (e.g. some collection of third-party packages is involved), then it
>> might be super helpful to be able to ask them to test with native-comp
>> disabled, to confirm whether or not that is a factor.  As many users
>> will, in future, be running a native-comp Emacs which has been pre-
>> packaged for their OS, they will not easily be able to perform such a
>> test without such a feature.
>
> I agree that we should probably revisit the issue after we have more
> experience with native-compilation.
>
>> > - inhibit the automatic native compilation of new code with
>> >  `comp-deferred-compilation'.
>> 
>> This, OTOH, doesn't use the "native" keyword at all.
>> 
>> Could we rename any such variables so that everything to do with
>> native compilation includes the word "native"?
>
> Yes, I think it's a good idea.  Perhaps also the commands in comp.el
> and even some non-interactive functions?

I'll be happy to rename these functions if we come-up with a list.

  Andrea