From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Dealing with obsoletion warnings in non-core code Date: Mon, 28 Sep 2020 15:24:36 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20200928143540.GB1002@odonien.localdomain> <83imbxlqc6.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="1850"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Sep 28 21:25:22 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kMym2-0000MS-Sb for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 21:25:22 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:43860 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kMym1-0006MM-VQ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 15:25:21 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:54662) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kMylO-0005wf-AB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 15:24:42 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:37445) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kMylL-0000mJ-G5; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 15:24:41 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 8DAD8441339; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 15:24:38 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 0438B441332; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 15:24:37 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1601321077; bh=H66Iy9QUiSTCVSg3Lps329Hgbjsa/x2EQx4uoniwW/A=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=Aj+7mNkOXHPcJfV/BfSgGqfuxJs11NQX87iFUrZzi/pPRuvP/23WNJEkxgoC7w6b+ yXsViuPd1PjcOGezjmbm6vCiBIHcsYMciBqjtceFGWyEPk5U1+y2bCXHhK9L2BiYzf STfN9nawnaLddW95Y2hUeWTQShuWPaRRQQqwHgn0cLSOoPVGGmUM09HnfcmYlCjZYF l1ysIXzJ5g7D5BGNmauFM4Kz5vetK21nTefbR09rnG2VllBVY2vc9JYUtlAx2t7DUj U4fWZBhQv+zCTEhoaNAMaf3RAK4b2QY59VkQVKId5ov5INAJdT1FUaQMJoUB+WUhjq r2aEn+aGVtNlw== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [45.72.232.131]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A1E871207C6; Mon, 28 Sep 2020 15:24:36 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <83imbxlqc6.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Mon, 28 Sep 2020 21:16:09 +0300") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/09/28 12:57:02 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:256636 Archived-At: >> > Ideally I'd like to be able to write the following instead to avoid the >> > needless repetition: >> > >> > (if (fboundp 'recommended-function) >> > (recommended-function) >> > (old-but-useful-function)) >> >> Indeed, it's a problem of which I'm aware but I don't know how to solve >> it nicely. > > What about something like the below? > > (if (> emacs-major-version NN) > (defun recommended-function (...) > ...)) I'm not sure I understand what you mean. You're suggesting to replace the `fboundp` test above with something like: (if (< emacs-major-version NN) (defun recommended-function (...) ... (old-but-useful-function) ...)) [...] (recommended-function) ? If so, I fail to see how it helps. It will still result in an obsolete warning on new Emacsen (and adds an "unknown function" warning on old ones). Or did I misunderstand your suggestion? Stefan