From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#8646: byte-compile-initial-macro-environment confuses byte-compile-arglist-warn Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 10:54:02 -0300 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1305122117 28989 80.91.229.12 (11 May 2011 13:55:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 13:55:17 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 8646@debbugs.gnu.org To: Glenn Morris Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed May 11 15:55:13 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QK9sf-0003h3-9O for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 11 May 2011 15:55:13 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60584 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QK9se-0005m4-Oe for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 11 May 2011 09:55:12 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:52631) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QK9sY-0005jZ-Ov for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 11 May 2011 09:55:11 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QK9sV-0003ql-Dr for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 11 May 2011 09:55:06 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:52820) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QK9sV-0003qh-CH for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 11 May 2011 09:55:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QK9sU-0000tS-Bf; Wed, 11 May 2011 09:55:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Stefan Monnier Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: owner@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 13:55:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 8646 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 8646-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B8646.13051220553371 (code B ref 8646); Wed, 11 May 2011 13:55:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 8646) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 May 2011 13:54:15 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QK9ri-0000sK-U3 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 11 May 2011 09:54:15 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QK9rg-0000s8-ES for 8646@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 11 May 2011 09:54:13 -0400 Original-Received: from 213-159-126-200.fibertel.com.ar ([200.126.159.213]:47262 helo=ceviche.home) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QK9ra-0001ZK-LR; Wed, 11 May 2011 09:54:06 -0400 Original-Received: by ceviche.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id E7AD766152; Wed, 11 May 2011 10:54:02 -0300 (ART) In-Reply-To: (Glenn Morris's message of "Wed, 11 May 2011 00:33:15 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Wed, 11 May 2011 09:55:02 -0400 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:46384 Archived-At: > Here's a patch that I think might be right in general, but still leaves > a warning in this specific case: The patch looks right, thanks. The "2+" vs "2-4" can be fixed by changing either the macro definition of its override so that their arglist matches. > Actually, I guess this patch is not fully correct, because something > that is in byte-compile-initial-macro-environment could be redefined > more than once, in theory. But it's better than the current version. (?) The intention of byte-compile-initial-macro-environment is to override "the" actual macro definition. Obviously, this presumes that the macro is not redefined elsewhere in a different way, otherwise the intended behavior is not defined. Stefan