From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Miles Bader Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: cc-vars.el Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 11:57:49 -0500 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <20021119165749.GA27657@gnu.org> References: <200211180057.JAA24537@etlken.m17n.org> <5bbs4m8qz9.fsf@lister.roxen.com> <5bwun97ecw.fsf@lister.roxen.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1037725271 24493 80.91.224.249 (19 Nov 2002 17:01:11 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 19 Nov 2002 17:01:11 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Dave Love , Kenichi Handa , rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18EBjt-0006KR-00 for ; Tue, 19 Nov 2002 18:00:41 +0100 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 18EBmg-0002gZ-00 for ; Tue, 19 Nov 2002 18:03:34 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18EBkd-0003LJ-00; Tue, 19 Nov 2002 12:01:27 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 18EBjG-0002I4-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Nov 2002 12:00:02 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 18EBjC-0002Gy-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Nov 2002 12:00:01 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18EBhD-0001UR-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 19 Nov 2002 11:57:55 -0500 Original-Received: from miles by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.10) id 18EBh7-0007Rh-00; Tue, 19 Nov 2002 11:57:49 -0500 Original-To: Martin Stjernholm Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <5bwun97ecw.fsf@lister.roxen.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.3.28i Blat: Foop 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:9548 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:9548 On Tue, Nov 19, 2002 at 04:45:19PM +0100, Martin Stjernholm wrote: > > E.g. when it sees (if (fboundp 'SYMBOL) ACTION ...), it could push > > SYMBOL on a list of functions not to warn about, while it was compiling > > ACTION. [other forms that macroexpand into `if' without modifying the > > condition would work too] > > > > _That_ sort of change is pretty easy, and has the advantage of working > > even with old compilers that don't special case it (they'll just emit a > > warning like before, but the generated code will be the same). > > > [Think of it as a pragma expressed in code...] > > That's the problem; you can't get the pragma without getting the code > then. E.g. if ACTION gets very large and I decide to split it up in > several functions I had to add otherwise completely unnecessary > fboundp checks in them just to silence the compiler. Why does it matter? A few extra fboundp checks at load-time are so utterly inconsequential that it's hardly worth worrying about the possibility that they might be generated in some cases. Do you have _real_ examples of a case where this method causes problems? If not, we shouldn't waste time wondering if there _might_ be some -- this simply isn't a very important issue. -Miles -- We are all lying in the gutter, but some of us are looking at the stars. -Oscar Wilde