From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Martin Stjernholm Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: cc-vars.el Date: 22 Nov 2002 02:51:11 +0100 Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <5blm3m8j8w.fsf@lister.roxen.com> References: <200211180057.JAA24537@etlken.m17n.org> <5bbs4m8qz9.fsf@lister.roxen.com> <5bwun97ecw.fsf@lister.roxen.com> <20021119165749.GA27657@gnu.org> <5b65utkyqt.fsf@lister.roxen.com> <200211201358.gAKDwsG21304@rum.cs.yale.edu> <20021120212939.GA29543@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1037930346 8377 80.91.224.249 (22 Nov 2002 01:59:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 22 Nov 2002 01:59:06 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Stefan Monnier , Miles Bader , Dave Love , Kenichi Handa , rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18F360-0002Aw-00 for ; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 02:59:04 +0100 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 18F39x-0000Hp-00 for ; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 03:03:09 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18F2zg-0003LT-00; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 20:52:32 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 18F2yW-0002Oi-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 20:51:20 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 18F2yU-0002Lf-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 20:51:19 -0500 Original-Received: from godzilla.roxen.com ([194.52.182.190] helo=mail.roxen.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 18F2yU-0002Ks-00; Thu, 21 Nov 2002 20:51:18 -0500 Original-Received: from lister.roxen.com (lister.roxen.com [194.52.182.147]) by mail.roxen.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0BF7599BC; Fri, 22 Nov 2002 02:51:11 +0100 (MET) Original-To: Miles Bader In-Reply-To: <20021120212939.GA29543@gnu.org> Original-Lines: 26 User-Agent: Gnus/5.0808 (Gnus v5.8.8) Emacs/20.7 Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:9617 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:9617 Miles Bader wrote: > It's not that I hate explicit pragmas with a passion or anything; if someone > can get something past rms, I guess that's fine with me; but no one's > presented much evidence in this thread that they're actually needed, and it'd > be nice to see what things they _are_ needed for -- and anyway, we need that > to design the pragmas anyway... Did I miss something? I've looked through the things I've used the cc-bytecomp kludges for in CC Mode, and sure enough, simple patterns for if and cond would take care of most things. However, some rather large parts exist only to add language knowledge to various external packages that are optional and might not be available at all. Putting conditionals outside the whole set of defconsts, defuns etc would then be necessary to silence the compiler. But doing so would give load order dependencies (i.e. it wouldn't work if the optional packages gets loaded later). And coping with that would require an eval-after-load around the whole thing.. Another more design-wise argument for providing them is that programming tools should be orthogonal to make sure all possible cases are covered. The stance that pragmas can get implemented when someone needs them aren't good since it'd be a considerable obstacle if a non-emacs core developer actually encounters such a situation. It's probably more likely that an ugly kludge is devised instead.