From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Noam Postavsky Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#29165: 26.0.90; can't use some code byte-compiled under emacs 24 Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2017 15:05:09 -0500 Message-ID: References: <6eh8u7x5be.fsf@just-testing.permabit.com> <87375r7f0g.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <9f1e7a1f-bfc0-43a4-9acb-cf69b85587be@default> <5C8038D7-FF85-4C42-A728-F3F85CDAC85C@permabit.com> <87efpb46sp.fsf@linux-m68k.org> <3EB0E53F-4B99-44C2-9F2E-1125A33E408B@permabit.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1510603574 13812 195.159.176.226 (13 Nov 2017 20:06:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2017 20:06:14 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Andreas Schwab , Philipp Stephani , 29165@debbugs.gnu.org To: Ken Raeburn Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Nov 13 21:06:10 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1eEKze-0003ES-R1 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 21:06:06 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56180 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eEKzm-0002mN-AF for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 15:06:14 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58709) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eEKzd-0002mI-Ua for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 15:06:06 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eEKza-0003f7-MT for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 15:06:05 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:58467) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eEKza-0003eu-IW for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 15:06:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eEKza-0006b5-5H for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 15:06:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Noam Postavsky Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 13 Nov 2017 20:06:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 29165 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: notabug Original-Received: via spool by 29165-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B29165.151060351825310 (code B ref 29165); Mon, 13 Nov 2017 20:06:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 29165) by debbugs.gnu.org; 13 Nov 2017 20:05:18 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38915 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eEKys-0006a9-3Q for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 15:05:18 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-wm0-f47.google.com ([74.125.82.47]:39433) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eEKyq-0006Zv-1K for 29165@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 15:05:16 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-wm0-f47.google.com with SMTP id l8so11715597wmg.4 for <29165@debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 12:05:16 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id :subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=K3Hwdc4VVWNC8583ArkGxSvYf/UdmYSHu5OQDkoj9jI=; b=DN/2jAL6+N/wP1iZ998ZirWsU94NRu0hcTBCLptMYSdaoj7SMdEkCulVLhS5oPZK3n xeKYjtUmTTgY5y2oo58b0RMBzVt9Xi1eeohtHeOuNtg8QHuKbXRl/s47ydMq1iUdVZmj mkzCJyiio12w8DNif2J1hX5VgrKokBSf75cnf4zPwKMRYkiUSYMWVzB0efHTwvPZjz8z gYUQeyatkcYGqjRvQ7B0D3N44A4JCSTq12H/4scCk8Ro96LOB5kwgQt0FmkdV6tgXCON ct10i9iTNB8Z1BR1Xu0H3YrklQ0KdvO2S2yX+lP25JOS6vcJ4WWBFZdAh72PygS+3Y5J EhUA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:from :date:message-id:subject:to:cc:content-transfer-encoding; bh=K3Hwdc4VVWNC8583ArkGxSvYf/UdmYSHu5OQDkoj9jI=; b=UxR5J+obQ08+Fby2aoMyBrwmid26LGU5xKsAxCWPmcIxZqf8DbXS+7eV/i15w805g0 KvOTzmSuIF4ZX4zVdScYivVhuxcb28hGi7IQzbKGxDKgi2HLC7+3Vir2+688hBVbx92o WJp7Cs5WqSsYVwveWwKKOMkvuFmS6eHvE8swkaJvJgfUAWjLTGBgPaePNn3R+0Vj6T0a PVNaVRFO4+FEL/3EzCniZFGDYFmrC3HwR513s5EAZoCDVgrB8xHcHRLzriM56v6d4ohg AhQVwA1wwZw2jCKJGU/kqsqL75617PtdiQWFq4BUM/sZNFadprthy0Hjdqnf6rDMfs2H VuPg== X-Gm-Message-State: AJaThX7z2f5Y102BXXYykbTALX4ltUqf7wG1TaN9mqrMgWRrNmm5zqfE /y4deCo7hiW9T8Vi5LpvwLsewVYf8hBVmxgSDPk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AGs4zMZ+v03ogJft3/lEUa8yvDw5zcVtTv1ph6HgJl9Dxb9LCJWaF9myo9h3knIl2xVU8TeLPCfayRE9BXqXXJ3ElBs= X-Received: by 10.28.17.77 with SMTP id 74mr6517380wmr.66.1510603510178; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 12:05:10 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.223.151.116 with HTTP; Mon, 13 Nov 2017 12:05:09 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <3EB0E53F-4B99-44C2-9F2E-1125A33E408B@permabit.com> X-Google-Sender-Auth: OLOZtwpGXKNeQgY6mHClCMmypa4 X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:139854 Archived-At: On Mon, Nov 13, 2017 at 2:42 PM, Ken Raeburn wrote: > But even if we do make it an error, isn=E2=80=99t there usually a stage w= here it=E2=80=99s just a warning? Maybe. There hasn't been this time (for plain defun, I mean). > (And if we=E2=80=99re going to make that sort of thing an error, we shoul= d probably check whether empty &key or &aux variable lists are similarly re= jected. I haven=E2=80=99t looked.) I believe empty &key would be tested in my patch, though not &aux. > If the source isn=E2=80=99t going to be rejected (e.g., if it=E2=80=99s q= uietly accepted or only produces a warning), then the byte-code for it prob= ably ought not to be rejected. Yes, that's why my patch rejects the source as well.