From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: Compilation warnings in mouse.el Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 08:22:47 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: References: <8360scdzik.fsf@gnu.org> <87zipnzvo4.fsf@gmx.net> <8337nfcupy.fsf@gnu.org> <83inw9a9tl.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1468423444 4069 80.91.229.3 (13 Jul 2016 15:24:04 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 15:24:04 +0000 (UTC) To: Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jul 13 17:23:51 2016 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 1bNM0t-0005Al-Cm for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 17:23:51 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48383 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bNM0s-0003vs-FV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 11:23:50 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:35033) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bNLzz-0003s6-FU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 11:22:56 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bNLzv-0007Wd-1T for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 11:22:54 -0400 Original-Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:22703) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bNLzu-0007WI-OZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 11:22:50 -0400 Original-Received: from userv0022.oracle.com (userv0022.oracle.com [156.151.31.74]) by aserp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id u6DFMnlC004361 (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 13 Jul 2016 15:22:49 GMT Original-Received: from userv0122.oracle.com (userv0122.oracle.com [156.151.31.75]) by userv0022.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.13.8) with ESMTP id u6DFMn3b025276 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 bits=256 verify=OK); Wed, 13 Jul 2016 15:22:49 GMT Original-Received: from abhmp0019.oracle.com (abhmp0019.oracle.com [141.146.116.25]) by userv0122.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id u6DFMmvP010695; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 15:22:48 GMT In-Reply-To: X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9 (901082) [OL 12.0.6744.5000 (x86)] X-Source-IP: userv0022.oracle.com [156.151.31.74] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] X-Received-From: 141.146.126.69 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:205642 Archived-At: > BTW, I'm not really opposed to the use of :group in general. >=20 > But I'm opposed to having it be mandatory in the obvious case of > a single-file single-group package, where the :group args are just > redundant. Why? That's the question that has not been answered? Is it just to allow laziness and less verbose code, or is there some real problem that it intends to solve? > My above 2001 commit was designed to solve that case and > it's proved to work fine since. "Solve?" What's the _problem_ with expecting :group when a group is intended?