[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: :alnum: broken?
From: |
Andrea Corallo |
Subject: |
Re: :alnum: broken? |
Date: |
Sat, 29 Feb 2020 23:02:37 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) |
Marcin Borkowski <address@hidden> writes:
> +1. I consider myself fairly proficient in Elisp; I authored quitee
> a few packages, some of them distributed on Github, some of them for
> private use for a few people. I admit that even that I know about
> compiler warnings, I never got into a habit of compiling my files. (I
> know I should, but consider me as a datapoint suggesting that compiler
> warnings are not enough.)
>
> My 2 cents.
My experience is quite the opposite. I can't imagine my self writing
large non trivial Elisp and going for a first run without double
checking against the byte-compiler output.
I agree in that respect that, given the cheap cpu time involved in the
byte-compilation process, we should move towards using this as default.
Andrea
--
address@hidden
- Re: :alnum: broken?, (continued)
- Re: :alnum: broken?, Stefan Monnier, 2020/02/29
- Re: :alnum: broken?, Óscar Fuentes, 2020/02/29
- Re: :alnum: broken?, Stefan Monnier, 2020/02/29
- Re: :alnum: broken?, Óscar Fuentes, 2020/02/29
- Re: :alnum: broken?, Marcin Borkowski, 2020/02/29
- Re: :alnum: broken?, Clément Pit-Claudel, 2020/02/29
- Re: :alnum: broken?,
Andrea Corallo <=
- Re: :alnum: broken?, Stefan Monnier, 2020/02/29
- Re: :alnum: broken?, Óscar Fuentes, 2020/02/29
- Re: :alnum: broken?, Paul Eggert, 2020/02/26
- Re: :alnum: broken?, Andreas Schwab, 2020/02/26
- Re: :alnum: broken?, Mattias Engdegård, 2020/02/26
- Re: :alnum: broken?, Andreas Schwab, 2020/02/27
- Re: :alnum: broken?, Mattias Engdegård, 2020/02/27
- Re: :alnum: broken?, Eli Zaretskii, 2020/02/22
- Re: :alnum: broken?, Richard Stallman, 2020/02/22
- Re: :alnum: broken?, Paul Eggert, 2020/02/23