From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ilya Shlyakhter Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: CL package suggestion Date: Sun, 8 Apr 2012 21:39:07 -0400 Message-ID: References: <27y5qciwgd.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <9lty10iwdr.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf302d49c872563304bd3512d8 X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1333935560 29223 80.91.229.3 (9 Apr 2012 01:39:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 9 Apr 2012 01:39:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Apr 09 03:39:19 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1SH3Zf-0003kx-2a for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 09 Apr 2012 03:39:19 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57094 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SH3Ze-0007UR-Fi for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 08 Apr 2012 21:39:18 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:43238) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SH3Zb-0007UA-Ip for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 08 Apr 2012 21:39:16 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SH3ZZ-0001wo-SX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 08 Apr 2012 21:39:15 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-yx0-f169.google.com ([209.85.213.169]:51227) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SH3ZW-0001pO-MK; Sun, 08 Apr 2012 21:39:10 -0400 Original-Received: by yenm8 with SMTP id m8so1981127yen.0 for ; Sun, 08 Apr 2012 18:39:07 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type; bh=PdgmYP1nUIBHkJbXMNEZ2w66tGSKPJy+VpoB49/J8vY=; b=Sw2xz4gcoUCb40WqF1MIB1Tow+r2RRz1EmV+XPMO9T6NDXPzWk0xGEWRzjPbicFUII 3P2BixcQEgpryAbW/B/mTpCDAQ85Z3rssJNd0mUdLVIo9V4fG31kxC4Bgj6vpjzviOMm PAN2FS+6AFqxDzizEZTKqolAf8JDkn9lHDYvJxM4C2038k2AwFkVfstMThLJlIPspBXY vLE1UM7TXZwR2B95QG4FrvPhILXOu6bYLz9UyACKjF3yzkcdB1Gyu+xNhTdh3SNAeDNe peZKYIBG+7w68AerZd1iH+rpqlvCKcGGvU42Ttzmv2UPHSJRABTEgp27Mwbbr19ZoOlR 3k7w== Original-Received: by 10.236.154.2 with SMTP id g2mr4438251yhk.103.1333935547241; Sun, 08 Apr 2012 18:39:07 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.147.168.13 with HTTP; Sun, 8 Apr 2012 18:39:07 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-Google-Sender-Auth: sjoVaAnP0YsjaEzegXHzuymAPdc X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 209.85.213.169 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:149485 Archived-At: --20cf302d49c872563304bd3512d8 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Right now, the cl package itself seems to violate the rule against calling its functions at runtime. E.g. (define-compiler-macro assoc* (&whole form a list &rest keys) ;; ... (if (floatp-safe (cl-const-expr-val a)) ;; ... floatp-safe is a function in package cl, and the compiled code will call it at runtime. Am I missing something? On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 9:06 AM, Stefan Monnier wrote: > > Agree about cl- being better than ecl- . > > Btw, if remove-if becomes defalias'ed to cl-remove-if, aren't the two > calls > > indistinguishable to the byte compiler? > > The name is different, so the compiler can definitely tell the difference. > > > If they are, and calling cl-remove wouldn't trigger a warning, > > wouldn't remove-if calls also become warning-less? > > Not necessarily, no. > > > Stefan > --20cf302d49c872563304bd3512d8 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Right now, the cl package itself seems to violate the rule against calling = its functions at runtime.
E.g.=A0

(define= -compiler-macro assoc* (&whole form a list &rest keys)
;;= ...
=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0 =A0(if (floatp-safe (cl-const-expr-val a))
=A0;; ...

floatp-safe is a function in package = cl, and the compiled code will call it at runtime.
Am I missing s= omething?

On Wed, Apr 4, 2012 at 9:06 = AM, Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> wrote:
> Agree about cl- being better than ecl- .
> Btw, if remove-if becomes defalias'ed to cl-remove-if, aren't = the two calls
> indistinguishable to the byte compiler?

The name is different, so the compiler can definitely tell the differ= ence.

> If they are, and calling cl-remove wouldn't trigger a warning,
> wouldn't remove-if calls also become warning-less?

Not necessarily, no.


=A0 =A0 =A0 =A0Stefan

--20cf302d49c872563304bd3512d8--