From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stefan Monnier" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: bytecomp warning for CL functions Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 10:10:28 -0400 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <200206261410.g5QEASU11961@rum.cs.yale.edu> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1025100749 28690 127.0.0.1 (26 Jun 2002 14:12:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 26 Jun 2002 14:12:29 +0000 (UTC) Cc: d.love@dl.ac.uk, emacs-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 17NDX3-0007Sd-00 for ; Wed, 26 Jun 2002 16:12:29 +0200 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17NDZC-0001qS-00 for ; Wed, 26 Jun 2002 16:14:42 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 17NDWx-0000n9-00; Wed, 26 Jun 2002 10:12:23 -0400 Original-Received: from rum.cs.yale.edu ([128.36.229.169]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 17NDV7-0000c1-00; Wed, 26 Jun 2002 10:10:29 -0400 Original-Received: (from monnier@localhost) by rum.cs.yale.edu (8.11.6/8.11.6) id g5QEASU11961; Wed, 26 Jun 2002 10:10:28 -0400 X-Mailer: exmh version 2.4 06/23/2000 with nmh-1.0.4 Original-To: Richard Stallman Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:5215 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:5215 > That is a good idea--Eli, would you please install it? > > I think it would be even better if these warnings were issued by default > whenever the file does not include cl. Does anyone see a reason not > to do that? Could someone explain to me what this really does ? I had installed a hack that tries to notice when you call a function that will not be available at runtime (because the library was loaded via (eval-when-compile (require 'LIB)) as is done for CL). It had a bug that I just fixed so it should be a bit more useful now. In what way does Dave's code differ ? I notice for example that it warns about code that uses `values' but since the CVS has replaced the defvalias with a defsubst for `values', a call to `values' gets replaced during byte-compilation so that it works just fine even without using CL at runtime. Admittedly, my hack is just that: a hack. And it's not reliable. But it is more genric and covers more cases. So my question is: which cases does Dave's code cover that mine doesn't. What I'm trying to figue out is if there is a way to get the benefits of Dave's code without having to hard-code any particular list of functions. Stefan