From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Correct byte compiler error/warning positions. The solution! Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2021 21:39:19 +0200 Message-ID: <83bl1w5fdk.fsf@gnu.org> References: <8335nfw2pe.fsf@gnu.org> <838rx4s224.fsf@gnu.org> <834k7ss172.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="27998"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: acm@muc.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Andrea Corallo Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Dec 04 20:40:16 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1mtatM-0007BK-7n for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 04 Dec 2021 20:40:16 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57554 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mtatL-0003Qk-Am for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 04 Dec 2021 14:40:15 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:46580) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mtasb-0002j0-5v for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 04 Dec 2021 14:39:29 -0500 Original-Received: from [2001:470:142:3::e] (port=43304 helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mtasa-0003N7-D1; Sat, 04 Dec 2021 14:39:28 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=26lYmiv8YVVadKeOfV5l3Yc7XVVJXOg9/SJZ5RUT+Dc=; b=KxK5M8KUExEw qLJhqcBTRm1Qxv6XE2YFPeLJDqU2tQa9c9BLDi8fuRHRy1OJzQscKa1UJOODaivM/U8r28mhJXkYM jimFfeXLIHJq9C7XBYPO+w9XGzLWweJorlSx6CYNfQezfZODNj1MBdVdSHYt90wzdkUfbI3E4KBq4 AZUTkgt7kKQtlyix4RM0NnIFlJ+0Mqa25dvTObDkR3eXaP3iOoWivNVdkDfhZDTPMH99e0V0DXggK FT+Q6Cr4TqaYpU0NuxmQ50Y0rM/TAFGjOYlPqo/5ml49yl4C29BUM76MZAznwaj+AScK4ehRglror b2aVE7HGh3RuecZArhSv+g==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (port=3810 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mtasZ-000075-Sp; Sat, 04 Dec 2021 14:39:28 -0500 In-Reply-To: (message from Andrea Corallo on Sat, 04 Dec 2021 19:22:02 +0000) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:280937 Archived-At: > From: Andrea Corallo > Cc: Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2021 19:22:02 +0000 > > I think it could be a good idea but I believe there's no need to use > macros here, we could have just functions return rvalues no? > > I'm not a big fan of C macros and I try not to use them whem possible. Macros punish unoptimized builds less severely than functions.