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: Would (Eval-when-compile (require 'treesit)) eliminate the need for (declare-function)s? Date: Mon, 17 Apr 2023 13:25:26 -0400 Message-ID: References: <6E9242F5-EC30-4BA5-A290-0AA6CCB7ECE7@gmail.com> <83fs8ya17i.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="15550"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cc: Yuan Fu , Lars Ingebrigtsen , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Apr 17 19:25:55 2023 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 1poSbx-0003m7-Ri for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 17 Apr 2023 19:25:54 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1poSbc-00051o-UK; Mon, 17 Apr 2023 13:25:32 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1poSbb-0004xH-PF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 17 Apr 2023 13:25:31 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1poSba-0000ZC-4y; Mon, 17 Apr 2023 13:25:31 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 61AA0802DA; Mon, 17 Apr 2023 13:25:28 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 4F2C18017D; Mon, 17 Apr 2023 13:25:27 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1681752327; bh=fBES87HqtfGdQXW57qD4/La6/cuJXgVaijpBPxsIKE0=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=KTuQRtayGiXMzrUYejk/Dl026/PU63TrZYqSHzkRY72wWRDTnr3VoFWxQNqkC4UvR W2Sg9lauF4vkx1gLxfHCIuYdbiQdxTMtNT3Yd/dkgXAgntVslaxe+TSYB5dzq73m94 bRkKHSA9FrpIgkuIZhDfrSLwWwFBGkHJR7cixkgk458Ju996hVH5htwBnqkSw1cj+A dB32guoXMdFiEb4G15HvN+Ty54fqzlIiXLoGaxVG7nrnhB9Utoqb0V/WSuaVxKcsuk hfqDjd/NZpzrkT+DyP4KQc4fWzdXnUDz6OtKfgYXD6ljoi9ynWjWBVTYRPp1QkJXSL dVOpEKtz1yfPw== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [45.44.229.252]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 24E751203D8; Mon, 17 Apr 2023 13:25:27 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <83fs8ya17i.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Mon, 17 Apr 2023 20:05:37 +0300") 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, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:305379 Archived-At: >> I=E2=80=99ve made the mistake of forgetting to add (declare-function tre= esit-xxx) >> when using functions from treesit.c far too many times (sorry!). Since >> treesit.el contains declare-function=E2=80=99s for every function in tre= esit.c, if >> we use (eval-when-compile (require =E2=80=99treesit)), would it eliminat= e the need >> for adding declare-function=E2=80=99s? I hope it doesn't: `declare-function` is supposed to affect only the "current scope", like `(defvar )`. >> Should we do that? IIUC one way to look at this is that `treesit.el` wants to "re-export" the functions provided by `treesit.c` so users of `treesit.el` don't need to know whether the function they call is implemented in C or in ELisp? That makes a lot of sense, and I don't think we have a good way to do that currently :-( I suspect in most cases we avoid the problem in one of two ways: - Always define the C function (rather than being conditional on some compilation flag as is the case for `treesit.c` functions). - Export from C only "internal functions" so all the non-internal API is implemented in ELisp. > Even if it does work reliably, I'm not sure we want that. It is > better to have declare-function where the function is used, as that > makes maintenance easier and less error-prone. But it makes sense for packages that do (require 'treesit) to be able to use those functions implemented in `treesit.c` without bothering with `declare-function`. Stefan