From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Interest in "Elisp lint"-like tool? Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2012 13:38:27 -0500 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1328207930 16382 80.91.229.3 (2 Feb 2012 18:38:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2012 18:38:50 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Daniel Hackney Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Feb 02 19:38:49 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Rt1YU-0003np-Ha for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2012 19:38:46 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39828 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Rt1YT-0008FZ-Jz for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2012 13:38:45 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:54960) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Rt1YN-00089J-9F for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2012 13:38:43 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Rt1YH-000116-RT for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2012 13:38:39 -0500 Original-Received: from pruche.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.22]:35575) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Rt1YD-00010g-BX; Thu, 02 Feb 2012 13:38:29 -0500 Original-Received: from faina.iro.umontreal.ca (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by pruche.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id q12IcRpS017544; Thu, 2 Feb 2012 13:38:27 -0500 Original-Received: by faina.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 3D03D130004; Thu, 2 Feb 2012 13:38:27 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: (Daniel Hackney's message of "Wed, 1 Feb 2012 09:46:46 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.92 (gnu/linux) X-NAI-Spam-Flag: NO X-NAI-Spam-Threshold: 5 X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 1 Rules triggered RV4120=0 X-NAI-Spam-Version: 2.2.0.9309 : core <4120> : streams <725169> : uri <1058590> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 132.204.246.22 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:148123 Archived-At: >>> Some of these style choices seem fairly uncontroversial (like making >>> sure `provide' is at the end of the file) >> It is not always possible though (to avoid recursive requires is the >> usual reason). > Haha, bad choice of "uncontroversial" example, then! ;) No, not at all. It's just that for many of the conventions we'd like to follow, there are cases where it's impractical to follow them. So, while some may really be enforced and should generate a clear "you need to fix this", the others should signal a gentler reminder. I fully agree (and I think Glenn does too) that provide should be at the end of the file, but I also agree that sometimes it's inconvenient to do so. Ideally, for every possible convention-warning (except for those which should hopefully always be followed such as ";;; file --- description"), there should be a way to write the code such that the warning is silenced. In the worst case, with the use of a comment or some other explicit annotation. Stefan