From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#39233: .elc file - possibly outdated backward compatibility comments Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2020 14:14:31 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87zhefkhi9.fsf@marxist.se> <835zh1rz1o.fsf@gnu.org> <83v9p0ri8g.fsf@gnu.org> <87ftg48yiz.fsf@marxist.se> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="67014"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: 39233@debbugs.gnu.org To: Stefan Kangas Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Jan 24 20:16:32 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1iv4RU-000HPL-06 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 20:16:32 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46784 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iv4RT-0003Sg-4S for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 14:16:31 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:57386) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iv4Q3-0002Kg-Ey for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 14:15:04 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iv4Q2-0002Rz-9V for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 14:15:03 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:48803) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iv4Q2-0002QW-5i for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 14:15:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iv4Q2-0002ev-0C for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 14:15:02 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Stefan Monnier Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 24 Jan 2020 19:15:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 39233 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 39233-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B39233.157989328210176 (code B ref 39233); Fri, 24 Jan 2020 19:15:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 39233) by debbugs.gnu.org; 24 Jan 2020 19:14:42 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54776 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iv4Ph-0002e4-KV for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 14:14:41 -0500 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:33647) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iv4Pg-0002do-DZ for 39233@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 14:14:40 -0500 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id DF0A7100A9C; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 14:14:34 -0500 (EST) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 512CB1009B6; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 14:14:33 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1579893273; bh=gUQOii3EFdc74mIFdY20LmZyQ9XVEhxxTr8Zx82Mbgc=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=DYplpNh1kIMKzeD2x24XYeCvQwqhk/8gTb3XP++PrWEdgWb2RbdP0n8vVnbloOIfk UgEMZhAorMAdLSlgWWfmYRsOwBdD/akyiP0Y2mcytBUtd5fkMbCRpaY/mG3dKNxyg1 CQsMwbLmqLldAVRDNh7LJxKY+CmlTCI2Gn05hgHsU1En254gyIGrr4Rhiqv3nd7p3E Nb+PF+dcQdhb6pg0feF3OWnswVW2/oCzrXwp7r//tfasN6tIVRe3bJts4Se7zQw+J2 7NBaXpp3KVTt1kJ1dhAvABT8xpbtEQVv7Zrboc0LyE0CJyTd7AZpwZroDSbKUQ5/2Q HPJzblA0iFqIA== Original-Received: from alfajor (modemcable157.163-203-24.mc.videotron.ca [24.203.163.157]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 289E91204BC; Fri, 24 Jan 2020 14:14:33 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <87ftg48yiz.fsf@marxist.se> (Stefan Kangas's message of "Fri, 24 Jan 2020 20:06:28 +0100") 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: 209.51.188.43 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:175242 Archived-At: >> + (format " (message \"BEWARE: %%S was compiled by a more recent >> version of Emacs (%s)\" #$))" emacs-version) > Is this important enough to warrant using `warn' instead? I don't have any strong opinion on this. I went with `message` because it seems to be less likely to cause trouble or annoyance: it's reasonably easy to ignore messages whereas `warn`s are more "in your face" in my experience. Stefan