[Top][All Lists]

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

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

From: Alan Mackenzie
Subject: Re: scratch/accurate-warning-pos: next steps.
Date: Mon, 10 Dec 2018 18:28:30 +0000
User-agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13)

Hello, Eli.

On Mon, Dec 10, 2018 at 20:15:18 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > 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?

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

There would be a function switch-to-BC-subrs accessible from Lisp which
would switch to the alternative interpreter, and switch-to-normal-subrs
for the reverse.  Or something like that.  byte-compile-file and friends
would use these functions.

Any recursive-edit would "bind" to the normal interpreter.  C-g, and any
other quit actions would restore the normal interpreter.

> Thanks.

Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).

reply via email to

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