From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eric Abrahamsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: compiler warnings for "unused" method specializers Date: Thu, 13 Oct 2016 23:23:50 -0700 Message-ID: <87vawvxxc9.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> References: <8737jz251z.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1476426313 31168 195.159.176.226 (14 Oct 2016 06:25:13 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 14 Oct 2016 06:25:13 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.130014 (Ma Gnus v0.14) Emacs/26.0.50 (gnu/linux) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Oct 14 08:25:08 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1buvvW-00078p-NE for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 08:25:06 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45139 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1buvvV-0004o7-82 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 02:25:05 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34808) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1buvv0-0004no-6F for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 02:24:35 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1buvuv-000129-8v for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 02:24:34 -0400 Original-Received: from [195.159.176.226] (port=56825 helo=blaine.gmane.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1buvuv-000105-1M for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 02:24:29 -0400 Original-Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1buvuZ-0008ON-Mb for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 14 Oct 2016 08:24:07 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 19 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:wPFWiTld7Z4OyB8eBcQjEarYvls= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 195.159.176.226 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:208228 Archived-At: Stefan Monnier writes: >> My other instinct was to just put "_" for all unused parameters, but if >> there's more than one of those, the compiler complains about repeated >> variables. > > It'd be nice to change the byte-compiler so it doesn't complain about > repeated variables for _. > >> For what it's worth, Lispworks does not complain about unused eql >> parameters in defmethods. It would make sense if Emacs didn't, either. > > Indeed for eql specializers, it could make sense to silence the > byte-compiler warnings, but at the same time, I'm not sure it's worth > the trouble to handle this case specially. So maybe it's not worth adding extra compiler code to handle method specializers, but it would be worth allowing multiple _s? I do like the use of _ to say "this variable intentionally and permanently ignored".