From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: bytecomp warning for CL functions
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 10:54:17 -0600 (MDT)
Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org
Message-ID: <200207191654.g6JGsH326961@aztec.santafe.edu>
References: <rzqhejse35l.fsf@albion.dl.ac.uk>
	<E17MznG-0008Pl-00@fencepost.gnu.org>
	<200206261410.g5QEASU11961@rum.cs.yale.edu>
	<200207081819.g68IJxN12844@aztec.santafe.edu> <rzqbs94x3zj.fsf@albion.dl.ac.uk>
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1027097799 10451 127.0.0.1 (19 Jul 2002 16:56:39 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 16:56:39 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: monnier+gnu/emacs@rum.cs.yale.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org
Return-path: <emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org>
Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244])
	by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian))
	id 17Vb3W-0002iS-00
	for <emacs-devel@main.gmane.org>; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 18:56:38 +0200
Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164])
	by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian))
	id 17VbFz-0001no-00
	for <emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org>; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 19:09:31 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org)
	by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 17Vb3X-0002z5-00; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 12:56:39 -0400
Original-Received: from pele.santafe.edu ([192.12.12.119])
	by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 17Vb1G-0002og-00; Fri, 19 Jul 2002 12:54:18 -0400
Original-Received: from aztec.santafe.edu (aztec [192.12.12.49])
	by pele.santafe.edu (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g6JGsMB11398;
	Fri, 19 Jul 2002 10:54:22 -0600 (MDT)
Original-Received: (from rms@localhost)
	by aztec.santafe.edu (8.10.2+Sun/8.9.3) id g6JGsH326961;
	Fri, 19 Jul 2002 10:54:17 -0600 (MDT)
X-Authentication-Warning: aztec.santafe.edu: rms set sender to rms@aztec using -f
Original-To: d.love@dl.ac.uk
In-Reply-To: <rzqbs94x3zj.fsf@albion.dl.ac.uk> (message from Dave Love on 18
	Jul 2002 19:53:04 +0100)
Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Subscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
List-Id: Emacs development discussions. <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel/>
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:5909
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:5909

    As far as I know, they're different things.  My code was specifically
    testing CL stuff, even if it would be present at runtime, whereas
    Stefan's would check for problems with functions not being available
    at runtime generally.

The way I changed your code, it warns about run-time calls to CL
functions from a file that doesn't necessarily load CL at run time.
Stefan, in your code, is the criterion the same: call to a function
in file X, from another file Y that doesn't necessarily load X at run time?