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: Can the byte-compiler check whether functions passed by name are defined? Date: Thu, 08 Aug 2013 09:07:19 -0400 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1375967255 20963 80.91.229.3 (8 Aug 2013 13:07:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 8 Aug 2013 13:07:35 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Sebastian Wiesner , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Klaus-Dieter Bauer Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Aug 08 15:07:37 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1V7PwG-0006dc-Ks for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 08 Aug 2013 15:07:36 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41709 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V7PwG-0003b4-5s for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 08 Aug 2013 09:07:36 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42594) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V7Pw8-0003ar-DM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Aug 2013 09:07:34 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V7Pw2-0001Ax-Hk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 08 Aug 2013 09:07:28 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.182]:6335) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V7Pw2-0001Af-DR; Thu, 08 Aug 2013 09:07:22 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av4EABK/CFFLd/Nq/2dsb2JhbABEvw4Xc4IeAQEEAVYjBQsLNBIUGA0kiB4GDMEhkQoDpHqBXoMT X-IPAS-Result: Av4EABK/CFFLd/Nq/2dsb2JhbABEvw4Xc4IeAQEEAVYjBQsLNBIUGA0kiB4GDMEhkQoDpHqBXoMT X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,565,1355115600"; d="scan'208";a="20991505" Original-Received: from 75-119-243-106.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([75.119.243.106]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 08 Aug 2013 09:07:14 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 8D0BF6335F; Thu, 8 Aug 2013 09:07:19 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Klaus-Dieter Bauer's message of "Thu, 8 Aug 2013 10:44:19 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 206.248.154.182 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:162497 Archived-At: > Applying either of your patches fails for me; Is there some > possibility we can check, that we are actually starting from the same > version of bytecomp.el? I have to admit, I don't have particularily > much experience with patchibg files... Check the code in Emacs's trunk (e.g. http://bzr.savannah.gnu.org/lh/emacs/trunk/annotate/head:/lisp/emacs-lisp/bytecomp.el). > What I intended to check: Does your code allow defining a function > after its first use as #'FUNCTION, as is allowed with normal function > calls (FUNCTION ...)? Yes: it reuses the code already used for function calls. Stefan