From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lars Ingebrigtsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Towards a cleaner build Date: Tue, 28 May 2019 11:49:16 +0200 Message-ID: References: <831s0xd3z1.fsf@gnu.org> <83pnohbhny.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="151559"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , Stefan Monnier , Emacs developers To: Noam Postavsky Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue May 28 11:50:08 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hVYkC-000dIe-6k for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 28 May 2019 11:50:08 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:59905 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hVYkA-0005xy-Mb for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 28 May 2019 05:50:06 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:40538) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hVYjU-0005ve-SU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 28 May 2019 05:49:25 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hVYjT-0007d2-TU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 28 May 2019 05:49:24 -0400 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.231.51]:41438) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hVYjT-0007Yl-NQ; Tue, 28 May 2019 05:49:23 -0400 Original-Received: from cm-84.212.202.86.getinternet.no ([84.212.202.86] helo=stories) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hVYjM-0003Pn-Nh; Tue, 28 May 2019 11:49:19 +0200 Face: iVBORw0KGgoAAAANSUhEUgAAADAAAAAwBAMAAAClLOS0AAAAGFBMVEUYEBYHAgUFAAMKBQoD AQa5lDYGAwcoJzUh8fW6AAACXElEQVQ4jV2TP4/bMAzFeVAuWksL6Fz7voBcGskaJIKzdqiR9YoY ySrAd+XX76PkBIdqCAL+/PjnUaKPdM7kVbfpxq30gchJfGGh3+mgLpXDHfM3ckHohZk+AHRTQNd1 rae+g6oNAPsnaLlV13Rt9FxApDRXBT7suqZ5872B8+i1AoSatmsb9i+BUjqjp2GtUU/bAsxWXGsN XuPMbIr5S1dfwfvHfUlRSw0EmwcY79vka5W2pAduV4Cusj5TQQMFA2RVkArepovj6KRnup0tjd+c zCuAKYu/ECndDhk9IduqmH7J63QxMKecTiVXBReAKSvtUvIYMQ9plKaCT/wAvNua8P1NojRvCDoo JgAU10WGqyQR/jGt4EJDilCoujm1HDrCPw8wwau0RW39ayaGnzYbi0QyoNkvEZYg1BcQRAS2J3xP dh+4nj9QACCATH4x0FQiUDiAkwPZPRXfryYAGK1fXeY0VsV3kTWVAbMKqUL8xNBKEkuqbIPMliqU EWDka5kjY7OLGIg1Pl08QMTn2aXTbWTer2AyoOUsJ7kFM7wefQLd7uQLMK/2minDnDT+B+zsl3QY Ru6jIpQfgIY5+eznxL0UmwTtf1K6m+V3c5ED83Wdm2jEu9FY3oEZsnsCvE1Il/IGsY7rGoclJ8xH Q1oVYVfNjdaVPZDN0/ZaPhvYZyHcn2O5y+oQj77s3Ls55qpo9tMSrIYny4Qrt6nPud4F70qqQ3aD oPqxe+ycTGNdaal+fCjW1dqA5iOeWsnTXyMaQLu2V+xJK5B+Z9cN4HjXxQZZDEiojkSJ/wDeGQCQ s8nNnwAAAABJRU5ErkJggg== In-Reply-To: (Noam Postavsky's message of "Mon, 27 May 2019 19:03:56 -0400") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 80.91.231.51 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:237079 Archived-At: Noam Postavsky writes: > I think this could have the unwanted side-effect of "polluting" the > Emacs session which runs the compiler with the obsolete function info > from the files it's compiling. That's true, but does it matter? > If we have with-suppressed-warnings then this auto suppression could > be implemented in a more obvious way by wrapping the output code in > (with-suppressed-warnings ...). Hm... You mean that if we have an obsolete declaration, then we alter the defun to be (in effect) (defun foo () (with-suppressed-warnings (obsolete foo) ...)) That seems like a rather drastic way of doing it, I think? > And perhaps as Stefan suggests, we'll find the automation isn't really > worth the trouble anyway. Well, it didn't seem to be much trouble as the implementation already works. :-) -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no