From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Michael Heerdegen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: possibly spurious bytecomp warning: Date: Sat, 20 May 2023 02:26:03 +0200 Message-ID: <87pm6vdf1g.fsf@web.de> References: <87edncklqt.fsf@web.de> <89c6535d-7f30-a5d9-4a9a-d5d35a359a89@dasyatidae.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="39147"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:MScSnyR7H5f4HMWh6X+i2ME9CDY= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat May 20 02:27:12 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 1q0ARE-000A1U-0n for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 20 May 2023 02:27:12 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1q0AQJ-00052Y-QI; Fri, 19 May 2023 20:26:15 -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 1q0AQI-00052I-1n for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 19 May 2023 20:26:14 -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 1q0AQG-00009k-DW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 19 May 2023 20:26:13 -0400 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1q0AQD-0008mg-Sa for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 20 May 2023 02:26:09 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ 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: -13 X-Spam_score: -1.4 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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:306221 Archived-At: Robin Tarsiger writes: > (cl-loop > for c in > '(?I ?o) > do > (when (assoc c eww-link-keymap) > (delete (assoc c eww-link-keymap) eww-link-keymap))) ; <-- > > Here, the list being modified is a keymap, so the first element > is the keymap type symbol and assoc never returns it. And notably, > delete's _docstring_ doesn't guarantee in-place modification for > non-head deletions, but the Info node for delq/delete describes both > functions as doing cdr splicing in that case, so assuming that's meant > as normative, this will operate correctly. I think this is correct. Maybe using higher-level functions for keymaps (e.g. `lookup-key') would be better. > It probably wouldn't be reasonable for bytecomp to try to distinguish > this, though... I would not harm if it could, but how would it do that? Michael.