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: master 2de25accaf 4/4: Warn about `condition-case' with quoted condition names Date: Thu, 29 Dec 2022 11:14:50 -0500 Message-ID: References: <167231424264.29966.177874348975736593@vcs2.savannah.gnu.org> <20221229114403.7EA13C05F48@vcs2.savannah.gnu.org> <95039AA3-39F9-4EFF-BEA2-695E8AB883C3@acm.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="14857"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cc: emacs-devel To: Mattias =?windows-1252?Q?Engdeg=E5rd?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Dec 29 17:15:38 2022 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 1pAvZC-0003bj-2b for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 29 Dec 2022 17:15:38 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pAvYg-0006Wd-0S; Thu, 29 Dec 2022 11:15:06 -0500 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 1pAvYa-0006VC-IT for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 29 Dec 2022 11:15:01 -0500 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 1pAvYY-0007tb-Jr for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 29 Dec 2022 11:15:00 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 37C391000EF; Thu, 29 Dec 2022 11:14:55 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id AB1501000DC; Thu, 29 Dec 2022 11:14:52 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1672330492; bh=vuHoc9JYDhhqu3p1KWTvoUApaUC7adS3DJ7aaGAxBJI=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=JwevkLUXzlEMqbr12zDQ6Gk6K02PnPTBjPS/W4as75g4BX8eibKaIcy6uOCx+X8dU /Mxb7qC4pzfEQrzYLcBA3EN4S56wiy0GcKJhK0jmkR/PVCtF82oQrJQWhmnm8kH9Lg HX6fUYdjvK8YRqV0NwQhPG331akdrbjJtBrivk4bKAqyxQOesHLIj6P4a+B7qlkRVT pnJbzaxXrSM+gQfmrUgcobKyRALtJFmj0x+RwPsDKA+mhnnuUZYxbTvGZj7eKd1NSK YOIu6DACbqhvwMTdeAO7l1Sb3WmvVty9Cbqyw75bLSJg1Q2y9xEVgtHTaaluBipyD2 mhqDaMzym2RNQ== Original-Received: from pastel (unknown [45.72.200.228]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 8246C12086D; Thu, 29 Dec 2022 11:14:52 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: ("Mattias =?windows-1252?Q?Engdeg=E5rd=22's?= message of "Thu, 29 Dec 2022 16:50:37 +0100") 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: 2.1.29 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:302039 Archived-At: Mattias Engdeg=E5rd [2022-12-29 16:50:37] wrote: > 29 dec. 2022 kl. 16.33 skrev Stefan Monnier : >>> But do we know all errors statically at compile-time? >>=20 >> Error identifiers should have an `error-conditions` property. > > You left the `error-conditions` property check commented out in > `byte-compile-condition-case` so maybe it wasn't quite that straightforwa= rd? I can't remember what came up, but my guess is that it's a question of making the byte-compiler recognize `define-error` and things like that (i.e. try and reduce the number of false positives where the error is unknown at compile time but will be known at run-time). Stefan