[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Byte compiler and eval-when-compile
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
Re: Byte compiler and eval-when-compile |
Date: |
Mon, 15 Oct 2012 14:41:26 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2.50 (gnu/linux) |
> Somehow the byte compiler got smart during the last days (I think it's
> the change in rev. 110510).
Actually, it just recovered the smartness I added many years ago and
which got broken years ago as well.
> I now get a lot more 'function X might not be defined at runtime'
> warnings than before.
That's expected.
> In CEDET, we often use `require' statements in function bodies, like
> this:
> (defun test()
> (require 'eldoc)
> (message "%s" (eldoc-function-argstring '("foo" "bar"))))
> The reason is simply to only do the require when it is actually needed,
> so that startup time is reduced.
> Still, if you byte-compile the above, you'll get a 'might not be
> defined at runtime' warning for `eldoc-function-argstring'.
Yes, that's an annoying case.
> I used to circumvent that problem by simply doing
> (eval-when-compile
> (require 'eldoc))
> Before you scream at me: I *know* this is not what `eval-when-compile'
> is for, but it has worked until a few days ago. It seems the
> byte-compiler now sees that I'm actually using a function from eldoc,
> but he still doesn't see that I'm requiring the package it in the
> function body.
If you both do the (eval-when-compile (require 'eldoc)) and the
`require', the byte-compiler could be smarter indeed: when it sees the
inner `require' call, it could check load-history and mark all functions
defined therein as being fine for the current scope.
> Do I now really have to use `declare-function' for all those cases?
Currently, yes (or use an fboundp test, which you probably won't like
any better).
I think a good solution to such cases would be to add a `lazy-require':
when interpreted, it works like `require', but the byte-compiler will
turn it into a bunch of autoloads.
A simpler solution might be to provide a new (funcall-require PACKAGE
FUNCTION &rest ARGS), so you'd do
(funcall-require 'eldoc #'eldoc-function-argstring '("foo" "bar"))
but the compiler could still be taught to check that
eldoc-function-argstring indeed exists in eldoc and accepts being called
with a single argument.
-- Stefan
- Byte compiler and eval-when-compile, David Engster, 2012/10/15
- Re: Byte compiler and eval-when-compile,
Stefan Monnier <=
- Re: Byte compiler and eval-when-compile, David Engster, 2012/10/15
- Re: Byte compiler and eval-when-compile, Stefan Monnier, 2012/10/15
- Re: Byte compiler and eval-when-compile, David Engster, 2012/10/18
- Re: Byte compiler and eval-when-compile, Glenn Morris, 2012/10/18
- Re: Byte compiler and eval-when-compile, David Engster, 2012/10/18
- Re: Byte compiler and eval-when-compile, Glenn Morris, 2012/10/18
- Re: Byte compiler and eval-when-compile, David Engster, 2012/10/18
- Re: Byte compiler and eval-when-compile, Stefan Monnier, 2012/10/18