From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Samuel Bronson Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: toggle-read-only should not give compilation warnings Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 12:23:51 -0400 Message-ID: References: <877gubszqq.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v936) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed; delsp=yes Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1342023863 23744 80.91.229.3 (11 Jul 2012 16:24:23 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 11 Jul 2012 16:24:23 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Chong Yidong Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jul 11 18:24:21 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Sozi2-0004ne-OD for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 18:24:14 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48677 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Sozi1-00016K-OU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 12:24:13 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:52544) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Sozht-0000iS-PG for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 12:24:11 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Sozho-00020G-62 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 12:24:05 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-qc0-f169.google.com ([209.85.216.169]:59248) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Sozhn-000201-Vr; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 12:24:00 -0400 Original-Received: by qcsd16 with SMTP id d16so1023505qcs.0 for ; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 09:23:57 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=cc:message-id:from:to:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding:mime-version:subject:date:references :x-mailer; bh=x1XkJZmB6YLev2U0zOdCbnWDCfpcCAcR837DiaCd4KE=; b=FXXIUelrIqEg7OG/s/q/RsrIjZGyptG4mAdPLUH5X76ZgnJsS9h5J5EXOItaJ2Mfjf ML5scO7ddEoFfd8V0sGKStYBd4y/7kwqSOuHbhOOJcCu3Dy+ltyAZzSj5Om7lQjLybA1 qbvx7Ro0n0h6Sn19ZaiC1qWbbTXEPP5aGTwNXGAnc+j4i7CUAcUQnhCLvYBeHcA2k86h wO2fsBsmglOkSwYIBNX6o9zJJs6oNrrqj35ULU1QGWGcLsT70A6PCNWcfBJ0C3BVvPx6 VlrFSSwGiKJldruaPePFdLkZrxdC77ErJQgVgaEXjnzabYbHZAiTzmt+qj/oLsIGcajR a6rQ== Original-Received: by 10.229.134.195 with SMTP id k3mr22602525qct.6.1342023836954; Wed, 11 Jul 2012 09:23:56 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from [192.168.0.18] (207-172-123-137.c3-0.upd-ubr1.trpr-upd.pa.cable.rcn.com. [207.172.123.137]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id he6sm3675102qab.13.2012.07.11.09.23.55 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 11 Jul 2012 09:23:56 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <877gubszqq.fsf@gnu.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.936) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 209.85.216.169 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:151536 Archived-At: On Jul 11, 2012, at 12:11 AM, Chong Yidong wrote: > There are lots of toggle-read-only warnings in the Emacs Lisp source > tree. As far as I can tell, the overwhelming majority of these are > all > legitimate use cases. The typical intention is "do whatever the > `toggle-read-only' command does, then do some other stuff on top of > that," so the caveat about toggle-read-only not being used in Lisp > code > is bogus. > > Instead of sprinking with-no-warnings all over, I propose removing > toggle-read-only from byte-compile-interactive-only-functions. Any > objections? Maybe we need an "explain why the byte compiler warning for the next form is inapplicable" form?