From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andrea Corallo Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Correct byte compiler error/warning positions. The solution! Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2021 20:06:11 +0000 Message-ID: References: <8335nfw2pe.fsf@gnu.org> <838rx4s224.fsf@gnu.org> <834k7ss172.fsf@gnu.org> <83bl1w5fdk.fsf@gnu.org> <838rx05ei9.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="32404"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: acm@muc.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Dec 04 21:06:58 2021 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 1mtbJB-0008Cq-CD for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 04 Dec 2021 21:06:57 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47798 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mtbJA-0007yw-Cf for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 04 Dec 2021 15:06:56 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:53358) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mtbIX-0006vL-5S for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 04 Dec 2021 15:06:17 -0500 Original-Received: from mx.sdf.org ([205.166.94.24]:55222) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mtbIU-0004bb-Si; Sat, 04 Dec 2021 15:06:16 -0500 Original-Received: from ma.sdf.org (ma.sdf.org [205.166.94.33]) by mx.sdf.org (8.15.2/8.14.5) with ESMTPS id 1B4K6BrS003117 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256 bits) verified NO); Sat, 4 Dec 2021 20:06:11 GMT In-Reply-To: <838rx05ei9.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 04 Dec 2021 21:58:06 +0200") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=205.166.94.24; envelope-from=akrl@sdf.org; helo=mx.sdf.org X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:280942 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> From: Andrea Corallo >> Cc: acm@muc.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org >> Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2021 19:55:28 +0000 >> >> Eli Zaretskii writes: >> >> >> From: Andrea Corallo >> >> Cc: Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org >> >> Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2021 19:22:02 +0000 >> >> >> >> I think it could be a good idea but I believe there's no need to use >> >> macros here, we could have just functions return rvalues no? >> >> >> >> I'm not a big fan of C macros and I try not to use them whem possible. >> > >> > Macros punish unoptimized builds less severely than functions. >> >> Yep, but in this case I'm sure the perf delta is not measurable >> therefore IMO functions should be preferred. > > I was responding to a much more general dislike of macros that you > expressed above, and wanted to explain why we do use macros in Emacs. I see, and understand why we use them, where we use them. Actually I've got the explanation when I proposed a patch to remove them some time ago :D :D And that's one reason why my phrase finished with "when possible". Andrea