From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Nonsensical byte compiler warning. Date: Thu, 05 Apr 2007 02:52:45 -0400 Message-ID: References: <85ps6okoe5.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <87lkhcj791.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87tzvwvj6c.fsf@gmx.at> <861wj04qcq.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> <873b3gpn4u.fsf@gmx.at> <86fy7g34tk.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1175756122 27023 80.91.229.12 (5 Apr 2007 06:55:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 5 Apr 2007 06:55:22 +0000 (UTC) Cc: acm@muc.de, cyd@stupidchicken.com, markus.triska@gmx.at, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: David Kastrup Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Apr 05 08:55:20 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 1HZLsL-0004le-Ur for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 05 Apr 2007 08:55:18 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HZLvb-0002PS-SC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 05 Apr 2007 02:58:39 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HZLvY-0002Lk-FO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Apr 2007 02:58:36 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HZLvW-0002IV-Ur for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Apr 2007 02:58:35 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HZLvW-0002IK-SL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Apr 2007 02:58:34 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1HZLsA-0004on-J7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 05 Apr 2007 02:55:06 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1HZLpt-0008VG-PZ; Thu, 05 Apr 2007 02:52:45 -0400 In-reply-to: <86fy7g34tk.fsf@lola.quinscape.zz> (message from David Kastrup on Wed, 04 Apr 2007 10:46:15 +0200) X-detected-kernel: 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:69079 Archived-At: > 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? The line number of the call to char-before, of course. The line number of the whole enclosing function is plain useless. I agree. I don't know how hard it will be to make this useful line number appear, but someone should investigate and _try_ to fix it. Let's have no more of the argument that this is not a bug!