From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Emanuel Berg Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Why have a #if .... #else .... #endif construct in Emacs Lisp, when we could make the existing code DTRT unchanged? Date: Tue, 05 Sep 2023 02:41:52 +0200 Message-ID: <877cp5pi27.fsf@dataswamp.org> References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="36406"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:lPzwlpgWYIY3RRX0szqhbSabT5g= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Sep 05 04:21:50 2023 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 1qdLhN-0009H5-Ds for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 05 Sep 2023 04:21:49 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qdLgc-0002jI-IJ; Mon, 04 Sep 2023 22:21:02 -0400 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 1qdK8t-0005XI-VN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Sep 2023 20:42:07 -0400 Original-Received: from ciao.gmane.io ([116.202.254.214]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qdK8r-0004lB-Ff for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 04 Sep 2023 20:42:07 -0400 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qdK8m-0003Cr-NJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 05 Sep 2023 02:42:00 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Mail-Copies-To: never Received-SPF: pass client-ip=116.202.254.214; envelope-from=ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; helo=ciao.gmane.io X-Spam_score_int: -16 X-Spam_score: -1.7 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.7 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 04 Sep 2023 22:20:58 -0400 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:310105 Archived-At: Richard Stallman wrote: >> How about making the byte compiler recognize the construct >> >> (if (< emacs-major-version NUMBER) ...) >> >> and do this optimization on it? > > People seem not to have considered this seriously, but > I have not seen any serious discussion of a drawback. > What flaw or drawback do people see in it? It should > optimize the existing the existing code with no change at > all. Isn't that just perfect? Will it drop byte-compiler warnings as well from the part that is dropped? -- underground experts united https://dataswamp.org/~incal