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: native-comp *Warnings* buffer Date: Sun, 16 May 2021 01:12:49 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87k0o2z9pr.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <83y2chzvxw.fsf@gnu.org> <87czttxquo.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="16440"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: eric@ericabrahamsen.net, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Richard Stallman Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun May 16 07:14:19 2021 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 1li96Y-000469-Kv for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 16 May 2021 07:14:18 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48652 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1li96W-00014D-Ue for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 16 May 2021 01:14:16 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:33982) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1li95I-0000MW-S3 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 16 May 2021 01:13:00 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:61016) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1li95G-0003S5-NM; Sun, 16 May 2021 01:12:59 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 966808075E; Sun, 16 May 2021 01:12:57 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 020B58066C; Sun, 16 May 2021 01:12:51 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1621141972; bh=tZdRGXWCxRSoOFhL2qiOd7uK6Nakfu1fdImsSleLwbI=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=g6iI14jRFDhQCtsGJ7Hi26nh1jjTg+7QTKHSEvYaLPF8X43EYxOSx87AupTZCuSRD qRCySe1RHD9Pit6nc1aqmnv0P+cBQwVWpX4+12/ze279cMQW9HuPhszIUCUjIkOUtI rB0tnwVzSp0d0Zhm3WfeY3EAwBLLcNrCB2+IIKxu+DJd1j1eoYKdWmeE0LrRrDZt9I oMeXfgm/c6Z6VYxLVKC2E8J5huiguRjuSPEV7+8ME62/WpRtgsHwcn/vke9webxwcb 9MdFTtGnpLYCV+cAbLkqxNcVvjjqXfIkfe+Mf6ov5juVuYgTcYzCw0amKICGzJBRDT yfyqHprpkRIhA== Original-Received: from alfajor (76-10-140-76.dsl.teksavvy.com [76.10.140.76]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B25351203A2; Sun, 16 May 2021 01:12:51 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Sat, 15 May 2021 01:33:14 -0400") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca 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:269327 Archived-At: > > I think "stealth" compilation performed opportunistically in the > > background should indeed not display any warnings (by default). > I understand the reason for saying that, but... would this mean that a > compilation of that material won't happen later? No, the compilation must have happened *before*, because native compilation is only performed for files that are compiled to `.elc`, AFAIK. > Is there a chance that you'll never see the warnings that > compilation generates? AFAIK, no, because before native compilation takes place, the code will already have been byte-compiled. Stefan