Re: scratch/accurate-warning-pos: next steps.

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2018 18:00:33 +0000
> From: Alan Mackenzie <address@hidden>
> 
> 
> Following an idea from Paul, I propose to build an alternative byte-code
> interpreter alongside the primary one.  This second interpreter would
> regard symbols with position as being EQ to the corresponding bare
> symbols, just as the branch currently does when symbols-with-pos-enabled
> is bound to non-nil.

I don't think I understood when will this alternative interpreter be
used, and when will the "primary" one be used.  Can you elaborate on
that?

Thanks.