From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: Compiled code in Emacs-26 will fail in Emacs-25 if use pcase [was: Add new bytecode op `switch' for implementing branch tables.] Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 11:00:31 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: References: <1b07c68a-873e-83c8-246d-423bc83a3881@gmail.com> <83y3xg4ldw.fsf@gnu.org> <22703.8413.359650.67917@retriever.mtv.corp.google.com> <22703.10479.123157.339839@retriever.mtv.corp.google.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 1487876527 5237 195.159.176.226 (23 Feb 2017 19:02:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 23 Feb 2017 19:02:07 +0000 (UTC) Cc: cpitclaudel@gmail.com, tino.calancha@gmail.com, vibhavp@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, eliz@gnu.org To: raman@google.com Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Feb 23 20:02:02 2017 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 1cgyeP-0000cl-0c for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 20:02:01 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60372 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cgyeU-0002kh-Qr for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 14:02:06 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52219) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cgyd8-0002ix-UT for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 14:00:43 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cgyd8-0008Rw-3C for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 14:00:43 -0500 Original-Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:24433) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cgyd3-0008Qm-9O; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 14:00:37 -0500 Original-Received: from aserv0021.oracle.com (aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233]) by aserp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id v1NJ0Yca018696 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 23 Feb 2017 19:00:34 GMT Original-Received: from aserv0122.oracle.com (aserv0122.oracle.com [141.146.126.236]) by aserv0021.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v1NJ0Ych011809 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Thu, 23 Feb 2017 19:00:34 GMT Original-Received: from abhmp0015.oracle.com (abhmp0015.oracle.com [141.146.116.21]) by aserv0122.oracle.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id v1NJ0XaF014582; Thu, 23 Feb 2017 19:00:33 GMT In-Reply-To: <22703.10479.123157.339839@retriever.mtv.corp.google.com> X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9.1 (1003210) [OL 12.0.6753.5000 (x86)] X-Source-IP: aserv0021.oracle.com [141.146.126.233] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 141.146.126.69 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:212554 Archived-At: > > > Really? What should we be using, and when was defsubst deprecated? > > > > defun or defmacro > > > > It has not been deprecated. > > > > I was expressing my opinion: It's rarely, if ever, needed, > > and misguided uses of it instead of defun are bothersome. > > Please separate your personal opinion from fact. I just did. But I should have added "IMHO" to my original message. I agree that it could have been misinterpreted as a statement of fact, that defsubst has been deprecated. That's why I followed up with a clarification. > And asserting that using defsubst is "misguided " is not a useful > way of carrying on a conversation. I did not say that defsubst is "misguided". I said that misguided uses of it instead of defun are bothersome. Which they are (IMHO). There may be uses of it that are still justified. I'm not aware of any, but it's not impossible that there still are some. As a general guideline I think my suggestion (opinion) is reasonable: We should no longer be using defsubst. Feel free to point to specific exceptions.