Sorry this is old; getting back into emacs-devel after a long hiatus. >>>>> "Jay" == Jay Belanger <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Jay> That would be nice. A while back, there was a discussion Jay> along the lines of doing something similar for functions, Jay> (defun foo) to keep the compiler happy. I recall the idea Jay> (not mine) meeting approval. Perhaps it's still planned for Jay> a future release? XEmacs has a whole suite of macros for checking whether things are boundp or fboundp, and for locally declaring them to be f?boundp to the compiler without using def* macros. We have found them very useful in suppressing spurious compiler warnings. If there is interest in using this code, they are not yet assigned to the FSF, but at the present time they are 100% written by Ben Wing <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> as far as I know. You might ask Ben to assign the code and avoid redundant work on this. The only advantage I see over the (defvar foo) approach is that you avoid spurious tags, but this can be convenient. These macros do not require any changes to the byte-compiler (in XEmacs, anyway), and can even be placed in a separate library and require'd only in the files where they are used. (I don't recommend this, just demonstrating that they don't interfere with the normal byte compiler.) Cheers, -- School of Systems and Information Engineering http://turnbull.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp University of Tsukuba Tennodai 1-1-1 Tsukuba 305-8573 JAPAN Ask not how you can "do" free software business; ask what your business can "do for" free software. _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel