Re: Time to merge scratch/correct-warning-pos into master, perhaps?

[Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>]

Hello, Gregory.

On Wed, Jan 26, 2022 at 18:46:40 +0000, Gregory Heytings wrote:


> > I think bikeshedding


> Bikeshedding, really?  "Futile investment of time and energy in discussion 
> of marginal technical issues"?  Please read 
> https://www.gnu.org/philosophy/kind-communication.en.html .  If Emacs' 
> efficiency is not something that is important to you, that's fine, but 
> it's not a reason to disregard those who consider that it is important.


> > is over a claim


> It's not a claim, it's an observation, which you can easily check (and 
> possibly contradict) by yourself.


> > that the new feature (which finally makes byte compiler warnings 
> > accurate)

It doesn't make the warning positions more "accurate".  That thinking is
a category error.  Warning positions are not "accurate to +- 0.2mm" or
anything like that.  They are either wholly correct or they are
incorrect.

> They are not accurate, they are _more_ accurate than earlier.  See 
> Stefan's answer above.

In the current master branch, the warning positions are not accurate, no
(see above), they are correct.

And if any are found to be incorrect, as has already happened, that is a
bug to fix like any other, and one which is now capable of being fixed
like any other, contrary to the previous situation.

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).