From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Thoughts on getting correct line numbers in the byte compiler's warning messages Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 13:01:49 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20181107170036.GA4934@ACM> <20181107184708.GB4934@ACM> <20181108140843.GB5041@ACM> <20181112154448.GB4459@ACM> <20181112213513.GD4459@ACM> <20181115163200.GA7216@ACM> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1542304819 32717 195.159.176.226 (15 Nov 2018 18:00:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 15 Nov 2018 18:00:19 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Alan Mackenzie Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Nov 15 19:00:14 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 1gNLw6-0008OK-OU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 15 Nov 2018 19:00:14 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40166 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gNLyD-0006oI-0d for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 15 Nov 2018 13:02:25 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:33255) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gNLxu-0006j1-RD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 15 Nov 2018 13:02:10 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gNLxi-0002pi-9I for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 15 Nov 2018 13:02:00 -0500 Original-Received: from pruche.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.22]:40272) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gNLxh-0002YP-Ny for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 15 Nov 2018 13:01:54 -0500 Original-Received: from pastel.home (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by pruche.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.7/8.14.1) with ESMTP id wAFI1nO7023914; Thu, 15 Nov 2018 13:01:49 -0500 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 17A4F68235; Thu, 15 Nov 2018 13:01:49 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <20181115163200.GA7216@ACM> (Alan Mackenzie's message of "Thu, 15 Nov 2018 16:32:00 +0000") X-NAI-Spam-Flag: NO X-NAI-Spam-Threshold: 5 X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 2 Rules triggered EDT_SA_DN_PASS=0, RV6419=0 X-NAI-Spam-Version: 2.3.0.9418 : core <6419> : inlines <6959> : streams <1804358> : uri <2750152> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 132.204.246.22 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:231170 Archived-At: >> Maybe the "big cons-cells" approach is not that bad after all, since it >> doesn't try to introduce new objects which are "equal but not": it just >> introduces a subtype of cons-cells and that's that, so it's semantically >> much simpler/cleaner. > > I'm not sure about that. We'd still have to modify EQ to cope with the > new structure no matter how we do it. No need to modify EQ for the big-cons cells: a big-cons-cell would be a normal cons-cell just with more fields added at its end. It's not a "location + pointer to the real object" like we need to do for symbols, so EQ will do the expected thing on it. Stefan