From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: What happened to (defun x)? Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2007 23:51:42 +0100 Message-ID: <854pfbuuip.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> References: <87k5o9h25c.fsf@everybody.org> <200711242144.lAOLi93Q006275@oogie-boogie.ics.uci.edu> <85bq9juwuf.fsf_-_@lola.goethe.zz> <4748AA21.9090807@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1195944730 4539 80.91.229.12 (24 Nov 2007 22:52:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 24 Nov 2007 22:52:10 +0000 (UTC) Cc: "Mark A. Hershberger" , Dan Nicolaescu , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Nov 24 23:52:16 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Iw3qo-0000aK-Bh for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 24 Nov 2007 23:51:50 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iw3qZ-0004E3-S7 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 24 Nov 2007 17:51:35 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Iw3qW-0004Di-Gu for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Nov 2007 17:51:32 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Iw3qU-0004CA-1e for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Nov 2007 17:51:31 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Iw3qT-0004Bv-NS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Nov 2007 17:51:29 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Iw3qS-0004wM-Sy for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Nov 2007 17:51:29 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lola.goethe.zz) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Iw3qS-0000Xf-9d; Sat, 24 Nov 2007 17:51:28 -0500 Original-Received: by lola.goethe.zz (Postfix, from userid 1002) id 44AE31CCF7FE; Sat, 24 Nov 2007 23:51:41 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: <4748AA21.9090807@gmx.at> (martin rudalics's message of "Sat, 24 Nov 2007 23:48:01 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:84082 Archived-At: martin rudalics writes: >> I might have missed the discussion: pre-22 we had considered having >> (defun nxml-define-char-name-set) >> be a byte-compiler silencer in the same manner as >> (defvar preview-version) >> is a byte-compiler silencer. The obvious advantage over >> "declare-function" is that one does not need to remember another idiom >> and name. >> >> Is there a particular advantage for a separate declare-function that I >> just am not able to see? > > It's a question of strong vs weak type-checking. The advantage of > strong type-checking is to catch errors sooner - in the special case > because a particular file fails to define a declared function. Its > disadvantage is that you can no more move a defun to another file > without finding and changing all files that have a declaration for it. Couldn't an autoload declaration be made to achieve the same effect? It specifies function and file, too. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum