From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Noam Postavsky Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] Make byte-compile-error-on-warn a safe variable for file compilation Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 14:44:59 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87wp0yhsgu.fsf@cochranmail.com> <87vaggrfqo.fsf@cochranmail.com> <87r2r2txqp.fsf@cochranmail.com> <87373fpujo.fsf@cochranmail.com> <87zi5mcjnh.fsf@cochranmail.com> <83inc968gs.fsf@gnu.org> <837esp663j.fsf@gnu.org> <83zi5l4ibe.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1515613408 31047 195.159.176.226 (10 Jan 2018 19:43:28 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 19:43:28 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Stefan Monnier , Emacs developers To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jan 10 20:43:24 2018 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 1eZMHK-00079y-TI for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 20:43:15 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35227 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eZMJI-0000fo-ST for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 14:45:16 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:44971) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eZMJ8-0000es-LB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 14:45:07 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eZMJ4-0002w7-ND for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 14:45:06 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-wr0-x229.google.com ([2a00:1450:400c:c0c::229]:45856) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eZMJ3-0002rY-05; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 14:45:01 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-wr0-x229.google.com with SMTP id 16so111424wry.12; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 11:45:00 -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; bh=1YLYkZtuTmQTDgYFWgEuS2yeOp57YvKRrGTE/WO4l84=; b=V0neBt4I9Zt4I2Kcmdgz/bgej7/hJFrZpaGnD6zSmVYQOW1Z0icwOATk5CQ/TsCTaw aBytLRH9B0Xk7uml9Z7l6mZ/tCnlbGrLSnsigmPP2flbQzVIM8B07TsdD77uYDGG5lkI JydUNWSW91eB6zY4vEDB7efViHljnFr89uC5WRgK/6TyEa8K18hKu7lpIeR8jlqdIEYV cqnyREfJ7XsNR6tSG1xXowoZv8PH9tc12pPY+P2tQP+eNQ1SJmst3BpD7vNeIxKTu/8I 6B2Bd3GU/Gf0kXUA47gjaakNCXLWJ1aVQGY7A4zE+08FbK4juX89mD7WdLdZEjCzXayq SOLQ== 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; bh=1YLYkZtuTmQTDgYFWgEuS2yeOp57YvKRrGTE/WO4l84=; b=DpXw5yHg/UhGIe28lpS32Ahm+S90lyfwumJlCJpikUcV6F1SRSE0mfHatO0C0bnJND hdE3jCfNyi9DvuY/wkapNtZvuwXGThTFCW4eEbUWpQpry8k4IbvsmeGbdyS8/Pt9Sfxo VzMstIIe5nOLfiTiBG9592Py+dCb/Q3CAKDiS5Zh9NAevpvYJwYOvhy9vHVMruA2kMVs JkPaFEzT+ZEk8T8n7WskQ2ICqE+c5nRwzXrxWQLO4+B9paJ2KU3ZdvnrPcj+kTWC23JY 0P+8Qxan1CkhuVNSQLe1vuWPgj3nNsjeWeF/Ge0hZ3hFLV5UucQMm+N/SknjH61uVfqv yaiw== X-Gm-Message-State: AKGB3mI6IfDnjgu6fO654cUEnW8UFW1qZ60QRSwYMkOFWMrgow9JtnwK IiWS831Snan/x5IwIiMuXjSsGM+FT6JyWvhWpMQ= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ACJfBosOhmcBAa46xc+WT/JDCTc2ecmzel1kzrF4x5fzsDEcT0uOakn04szVSgMFjaQaFTMKqmmiGuN+Wrq1kMqUphE= X-Received: by 10.223.182.76 with SMTP id i12mr18355750wre.92.1515613499612; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 11:44:59 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: by 10.223.142.53 with HTTP; Wed, 10 Jan 2018 11:44:59 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <83zi5l4ibe.fsf@gnu.org> X-Google-Sender-Auth: fVcWow1qZ5uT6kTHtaQeVoDuYNc X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:400c:c0c::229 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:221808 Archived-At: On Wed, Jan 10, 2018 at 2:36 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> From: Noam Postavsky >> Date: Wed, 10 Jan 2018 11:29:45 -0500 >> Cc: Stefan Monnier , Emacs developers >> >> >> Since this autoload vs :safe property consideration applies more >> >> generally, shouldn't we rather explain in it in the manual? >> > >> > I think we should do both. The fact that some unusual technique is in >> > the manual doesn't yet mean commentary about it will be redundant. >> >> But there are many other cases of this autoloaded put, should we >> comment on all of them? > > Maybe we should do that on more than just this one. But even a > thousand-mile journey begins with a single step. > > Did you never have this moment of staring at a piece of code that > doesn't explain itself and has no comments, and wondering why the heck > did they do it that way? It is not easy to find answers to such > questions, even if they are in some manual. To me, this looks like it should be considered a standard technique, that we shouldn't need to explain over and over again (but currently it's not even explained once in the manual, which is not good).