Re: bad change to tooltip.el

[Dave Love]

Nick Roberts <address@hidden> writes:

> It appears that three of the features weren't need, so it was 75%
> right.

The other things that were `require'd were for compilation warnings.
I don't think it's `right' to remove them.

> You might like to always see the bottle as being half empty, but
> please remember some of us prefer to see it as half full.

This bizarre sort of response is hardly the way to encourage people to
report bugs.  This was just a broken change.

> So that the reason for its inclusion is apparent (I thought it was 
> (unnecessarily) there for the cl push and pop macros ),

If so, it was harmless.  You check such a guess by commenting out and
looking at the compiler warnings, which I've done often enough.  When
it says that `case' is undefined and that t is called as a function,
obviously the guess was wrong.  Anyway, we already did this sort of
job during Emacs 21 development, but only for cleanliness.

> I've added a comment.
> Perhaps the suggestion of this practice could replace the current one in
> tips.texi.

Then you have to maintain the comments...

> Of course, once CL has been required for compilation then all the
> following lisp files are compiled with those macros, and not those
> in subr.el which have been overwritten.

If you mean you're compiling multiple files in one Emacs session and
especially looking at compiler messages, then don't do that.  It's
important to compile things separately, as the makefile targets do.