From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Compilation warnings in mouse.el Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 17:30:04 +0300 Message-ID: <83k2gpa9w3.fsf@gnu.org> References: <8360scdzik.fsf@gnu.org> <87zipnzvo4.fsf@gmx.net> <8337nfcupy.fsf@gnu.org> <3c7a2436-24d1-958c-bc86-7eb01921d810@yandex.ru> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1468420329 17862 80.91.229.3 (13 Jul 2016 14:32:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 14:32:09 +0000 (UTC) Cc: stephen.berman@gmx.net, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Dmitry Gutov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jul 13 16:32:04 2016 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 1bNLCl-0002q3-Qi for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 16:32:03 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:48060 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bNLCj-0003MU-UH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 10:32:01 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45728) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bNLBB-0002iP-8I for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 10:30:29 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bNLB6-0002h5-5j for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 10:30:24 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:55265) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bNLB6-0002gb-2Y; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 10:30:20 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:3830 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1bNLB4-00059W-IT; Wed, 13 Jul 2016 10:30:19 -0400 In-reply-to: <3c7a2436-24d1-958c-bc86-7eb01921d810@yandex.ru> (message from Dmitry Gutov on Wed, 13 Jul 2016 01:56:30 +0300) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e 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:205631 Archived-At: > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > From: Dmitry Gutov > Date: Wed, 13 Jul 2016 01:56:30 +0300 > > On 07/12/2016 08:04 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > Unlike Stefan, I think we should add :group to every defcustom. > > The additions to each file just have to be consistent with what's > already there. The presently discussed patch, wasn't. But if each defcustom has its :group, then the need for consistency is no longer a requirement, is it? > Speaking of personal preference, however, I'd rather using the `mouse' > group didn't work, in the absence of a defgroup somewhere. If we can do something to that effect, I don't think I will object. > > Having them mysteriously missing from some of them is a time bomb: > > remove or add enough defcustoms in the same file, and you have a bug. > > How would removing a defcustom, or merely adding one, lead to a bug? Well, not bug, a compilation warning that suddenly appears out of nowhere for code that was there for a long time. > The new defcustom might have :group unspecified, and if there's no > defgroup in the current file, it would become a problem, but that's > unrelated to any defcustom's already present in the file. AFAIU, extant defcustoms could start causing warnings, given some changes in other defcustom's. Am I mistaken? In short, I think having one defcustom depend on another is bad for maintenance.