From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Markus Triska Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Nonsensical byte compiler warning. Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2007 10:19:45 +0200 Message-ID: <873b3gpn4u.fsf@gmx.at> References: <85ps6okoe5.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <87lkhcj791.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87tzvwvj6c.fsf@gmx.at> <861wj04qcq.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1175674915 1287 80.91.229.12 (4 Apr 2007 08:21:55 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2007 08:21:55 +0000 (UTC) Cc: acm@muc.de, Chong Yidong , rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: David Kastrup Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 04 10:21:47 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 1HZ0kT-0001jX-QK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2007 10:21:46 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HZ0ng-00066n-V3 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2007 04:25:05 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HZ0lw-0005TW-SP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2007 04:23:16 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HZ0lu-0005T1-W6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2007 04:23:16 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HZ0lu-0005Sx-Nn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2007 04:23:14 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.gmx.net ([213.165.64.20]) by monty-python.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1HZ0id-0006QM-Tv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2007 04:19:52 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 04 Apr 2007 08:19:46 -0000 Original-Received: from chello062178240212.3.14.tuwien.teleweb.at (EHLO enterprise) [62.178.240.212] by mail.gmx.net (mp057) with SMTP; 04 Apr 2007 10:19:46 +0200 X-Authenticated: #4064391 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX18LZ/dqab0LH+eNAosab6go0vMGBZVRw/Yox3Wr2J MC3eNbT+zWosZT In-Reply-To: <861wj04qcq.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> (David Kastrup's message of "Wed\, 04 Apr 2007 08\:15\:49 +0200") X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.6 (newer, 1) 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:69038 Archived-At: David Kastrup writes: > It points to c-end-of-defun, but the line number and described > called function are nonsensical. The line number is that of the first form of the function the questionable code is in. That makes sense, since the problem is in that function. It is *not* the call of char-before that's bogus. It's that its return value isn't used in the caller, c-end-of-defun. Any line of that function could contain the oversight. What line number would in your view make more sense to report? And yes, improving the optimiser to report `char-before' instead of `char-after' would be nice. I doubt that it would help anyone who can't find the problem with the current (quite good) message though.