[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

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

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: scratch/accurate-warning-pos: next steps.
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2018 20:15:18 +0200

> 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


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]