From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#69290: declare-function doesn't work when combined with --eval and -batch Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2024 05:30:22 +0200 Message-ID: <864je2o5o1.fsf@gnu.org> References: <868r3eoqw0.fsf@gnu.org> <2f376e6d58b58f3fa8afa5376018a37b1ba3fab4.camel@yandex.ru> <867ciyoqc4.fsf@gnu.org> <7c6965eaa2f67eaba8128228033dc0b0d0efb42b.camel@yandex.ru> <865xyiopkn.fsf@gnu.org> <53767a63f52ce77960e41d07cdfd40c4eaad75d4.camel@yandex.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="27518"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 69290@debbugs.gnu.org To: Konstantin Kharlamov , Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 21 04:31:09 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1rcdK9-0006zY-4B for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 21 Feb 2024 04:31:09 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rcdJj-0001T9-Sz; Tue, 20 Feb 2024 22:30:44 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rcdJg-0001Sl-36 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Feb 2024 22:30:41 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:5::43]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rcdJf-00047M-Pp for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Feb 2024 22:30:39 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rcdK1-0006SV-QA for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 20 Feb 2024 22:31:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2024 03:31:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 69290 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 69290-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B69290.170848625824818 (code B ref 69290); Wed, 21 Feb 2024 03:31:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 69290) by debbugs.gnu.org; 21 Feb 2024 03:30:58 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:47529 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rcdJx-0006SD-EA for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 20 Feb 2024 22:30:57 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:60040) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1rcdJt-0006Ry-9E for 69290@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 20 Feb 2024 22:30:55 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1rcdJR-00045x-4n; Tue, 20 Feb 2024 22:30:25 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-version:References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From: Date; bh=RGo3LJGQw898vbAm4uYmmkKjhPYRkXpPNUydfHDn8LU=; b=ljY7nQwQGx+Q1zl8F5XH 6D4KiC5GU8HGB2CFiiMnSCYnu0TIk/qrOarv79RQ4b0TqRa0HizUF3xBpwUvYrJg0LDCFngmCNj/j 8pjYFjm4Qj/M1LqeDo89Y7hJ8raHktZ8u54okJei6d9SctE8di5Rvya49X/koT1h9qFnKpWtocGzN PqL1DJr2upDigRdXk4evviFAv3ME+RsVyp0W7uj0mW7B7Sf2j8MqRqDk7V6400fS/+lCuu0hOij0Z TnEixqBjz8t47oeO7Jyk4terh3TZp3PP4JYRKY0qRu2JvTgjyc0NsIdnXqja6qd9EXNlcOnvY6Ivp UjnYr/yDEdv0Ag==; In-Reply-To: <53767a63f52ce77960e41d07cdfd40c4eaad75d4.camel@yandex.ru> (message from Konstantin Kharlamov on Wed, 21 Feb 2024 00:28:46 +0300) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:280371 Archived-At: > From: Konstantin Kharlamov > Cc: 69290@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Wed, 21 Feb 2024 00:28:46 +0300 > > On Tue, 2024-02-20 at 23:31 +0300, Konstantin Kharlamov wrote: > > On Tue, 2024-02-20 at 22:20 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > > From: Konstantin Kharlamov > > > > Cc: 69290@debbugs.gnu.org > > > > Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2024 23:13:27 +0300 > > > > > > > > > Does --eval '(declare-function hello nil)' tell anything to the > > > > > byte-compiler? > > > > > > > > Well, I can guess by the way you're asking that the answer is > > > > "no", > > > > but > > > > I have no idea why so. It should. > > > > > > How can it?  The declare-function form is evaluated by the startup > > > code, and only after that the byte-compiler is invoked to compile > > > test.el.  At least this is my analysis of what happens here. > > > > > > > It is the same as if you pop up Emacs, evaluate a (defun hello()) > > > > and then call `byte-compile-file` over the `test.el`. There won't > > > > be > > > > a warning, despite that `(defun hello ())` was never byte- > > > > compiled > > > > (AFAIK Emacs does note byte-compile evaluated code). > > > > > > For the declare-function form to take effect, the byte-compiler > > > needs > > > to evaluate the form.  By contrast, defun is evaluated by the Lisp > > > interpreter and the result is stored in the global state. > > > > Oh, thank you for explanation, I see. It's doesn't seem to be obvious > > to a bystander, because from the side it seems like in Emacs byte- > > compiler and interpreter should work in a tandem, as in the example > > with evaluating (defun hello()). In Emacs context the doc-string that > > says `Tell the byte-compiler that function FN is defined` would read > > to > > me as "modify global state, which later will be read by byte-compiler > > to deem FN as defined". IOW, to me as a bystander the documentation > > string does not explain the difference, which is why we just had this > > somewhat long discussion before I understood why `declare-function` > > works this way. > > Btw, I just figured out how to show you why this doc-string doesn't say > anything on the matter. Imagine for a second that `declare-function` is > getting through from "eval" to the byte-compiler, i.e. the problem > we're discussing is just not present. Would you change the string `Tell > the byte-compiler that function FN is defined` to something else in > this case? I would not, because it's still byte-compiler that does all > the checking, so the point that "declare-function" is purposed for > `byte-compiler` stands. Stefan, any comments or suggestion for how best to document this (if I'm right)?