From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] Renaming non-X x_* identifiers Date: Tue, 16 Apr 2019 08:55:38 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87wokp4okn.fsf@gmail.com> <87d0men4jx.fsf@gmail.com> <83o95sisk7.fsf@gnu.org> <87mulcnui4.fsf@gmail.com> <83bm1si7lf.fsf@gnu.org> <87ef6ont03.fsf@gmail.com> <83a7hci44l.fsf@gnu.org> <87a7hcndtc.fsf@gmail.com> <831s2nhza8.fsf@gnu.org> <87d0lpvq6n.fsf_-_@gmail.com> <83r2a5keo7.fsf@gnu.org> <87pnppu4ox.fsf@gmail.com> <83muktk9xb.fsf@gnu.org> <875zrhtg2i.fsf@gmail.com> <83ftqkk7lr.fsf@gnu.org> <877ebwvatg.fsf@gmail.com> <83y34cin3g.fsf@gnu.org> <87y34ctrs1.fsf@gmail.com> <83h8azianr.fsf@gnu.org> <83v9zehed2.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="224038"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Apr 16 14:56:37 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hGNdY-000vyt-7F for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 14:56:32 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36227 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hGNdX-0003Pb-8m for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 08:56:31 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:33741) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hGNcz-0003PW-Ej for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 08:55:58 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hGNcy-0008HA-JS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 08:55:57 -0400 Original-Received: from [195.159.176.226] (port=38440 helo=blaine.gmane.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hGNcw-0008Du-U2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 08:55:56 -0400 Original-Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hGNcn-000uyI-NH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Apr 2019 14:55:45 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Cancel-Lock: sha1:gso71JxtmTWzcTJAaQURB7TdNOY= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 195.159.176.226 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:235515 Archived-At: >> BTW, instead of setting those hook function slots to NULL in >> text-terminals and then test for non-NULL-ness before calling them, >> can't we set them to `the_ignore_function`, which we could implement as >> a vararg function which does nothing? > > I thought about that, but calling an empty function would add a small > inefficiency, significantly larger than just a test against NULL. I doubt efficiency at those places in the code would ever be noticeable ;-) I was thinking about it from the point of the view of maintenance rather than efficiency: it removes the need to know which slots might be NULL (and hence require a test) and which not, so it should simplify the code. Anyway, either way is fine, of course, Stefan