From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel
Subject: Re: safe_call1 considered harmful
Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 14:22:04 -0400
Message-ID: <E1G5548-0002HD-8x@fencepost.gnu.org>
References: <uirlrguz3.fsf@gnu.org> <E1G3tGq-0006Z3-00@etlken>
	<E1G40o4-0007uN-FH@fencepost.gnu.org> <E1G4pUQ-00062s-00@etlken>
Reply-To: rms@gnu.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1153765388 17211 80.91.229.2 (24 Jul 2006 18:23:08 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2006 18:23:08 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: eliz@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org
Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jul 24 20:23:04 2006
Return-path: <emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org
Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165])
	by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1G554u-0006Vh-7O
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 24 Jul 2006 20:22:52 +0200
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43)
	id 1G554t-0008JX-C8
	for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 24 Jul 2006 14:22:51 -0400
Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1G554A-0007xd-O3
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Jul 2006 14:22:06 -0400
Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43)
	id 1G554A-0007wg-4U
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Jul 2006 14:22:06 -0400
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G5549-0007wX-VP
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Jul 2006 14:22:05 -0400
Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1G555I-0006rZ-R8
	for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Jul 2006 14:23:16 -0400
Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34)
	id 1G5548-0002HD-8x; Mon, 24 Jul 2006 14:22:04 -0400
Original-To: Kenichi Handa <handa@m17n.org>
In-reply-to: <E1G4pUQ-00062s-00@etlken> (message from Kenichi Handa on Mon, 24
	Jul 2006 10:44:10 +0900)
X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." <emacs-devel.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/pipermail/emacs-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-devel@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel>,
	<mailto:emacs-devel-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:57555
Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel/57555>

    find-operation-coding-system calls a registered function
    with a single argument; a list of arguments given to
    find-operation-coding-system.  So, appending an extra
    argument at the tail of the list is fairly safe.

It might seem that way; but what happens if we change the calling
convention of one of the operations, giving it an additional argument?
That may be necessary some day.  I prefer the current convention.