From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Matt Armstrong Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#46819: 28.0.50; Undesireable warning: Empty let body from the `benchmark-run' implementation Date: Tue, 09 Mar 2021 20:53:19 -0800 Message-ID: <874khj8v9c.fsf@rfc20.org> References: <87h7lwmgaj.fsf@gnus.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="4735"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) Cc: Stefan Monnier , 46819@debbugs.gnu.org To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 10 05:54:16 2021 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 1lJqrQ-00017M-Jo for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 05:54:16 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53434 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lJqrP-0004kY-MP for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 09 Mar 2021 23:54:15 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:55616) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lJqrC-0004b4-Qb for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Mar 2021 23:54:02 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:36902) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lJqrC-00060j-JT for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Mar 2021 23:54:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lJqrC-0004JA-H9 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Mar 2021 23:54:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Matt Armstrong Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 10 Mar 2021 04:54:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 46819 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 46819-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B46819.161535201616508 (code B ref 46819); Wed, 10 Mar 2021 04:54:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 46819) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Mar 2021 04:53:36 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:48445 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lJqql-0004IC-Sy for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 09 Mar 2021 23:53:36 -0500 Original-Received: from relay10.mail.gandi.net ([217.70.178.230]:59143) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lJqqg-0004Hu-Uv for 46819@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 09 Mar 2021 23:53:34 -0500 Original-Received: from mdeb (24-113-169-116.wavecable.com [24.113.169.116]) (Authenticated sender: matt@rfc20.org) by relay10.mail.gandi.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3BF9D240008; Wed, 10 Mar 2021 04:53:22 +0000 (UTC) Original-Received: from matt by mdeb with local (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1lJqqV-000lXL-Rv; Tue, 09 Mar 2021 20:53:19 -0800 In-Reply-To: <87h7lwmgaj.fsf@gnus.org> (Lars Ingebrigtsen's message of "Sun, 28 Feb 2021 15:13:24 +0100") 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:201958 Archived-At: Lars Ingebrigtsen writes: > Stefan Monnier writes: > >> It'd be easy to put an explicit nil in the loop's body, but.... >> >> The idea was that in actual (non-macroexpanded) source code, empty let >> bodies are usually the result of a misplaced paren. But it's probably >> more often annoying than useful since we can't easily distinguish a "let >> from source code" from a "let from a macro expansion". >> >> So I'm also voting to revert that change. >> Any objection? > > It is a nice and helpful warning, though, so if it could be fixed in > another way, that'd be great. (But I have no idea how, of course.) So, after a little flurry of a conversation, this went quiet. How about we fix benchmark's use of `let', and leave the warning in place. It does not seem to be generating many other complaints, so it may not be particularly annoying after all. I'm currently working with `benchmark-run' a bunch and would like the warning gone from that one use. I can make a patch, but a one liner might be quicker for one of you to just commit directly. ;-)