[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 20:39:56 +0200

> Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2018 18:28:30 +0000
> Cc: address@hidden
> From: Alan Mackenzie <address@hidden>
> > 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?
> Yes.  The alternative interpreter would be used only for byte
> compilation (and possibly other programs which want to use the symbols
> with position mechanism), the primary one will be used at all other
> times.

Then how about invoking this alternative interpreter only if the prime
interpreter detected a warning or error while byte-compiling?  You
could invoke the alternative interpreter only on the form where the
problem was detected, with the goal of "drilling down" to find the
exact position of the problematic symbol(s).

This would have the advantage of not only avoiding the slow-down in
the "prime" interpreter, but also avoiding slowing down byte
compilation of error-free sources.

Does this make sense?

reply via email to

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