Re: Correct byte compiler error/warning positions. The solution!

[Andrea Corallo]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> From: Andrea Corallo <akrl@sdf.org>
>> Cc: acm@muc.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org
>> Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2021 19:55:28 +0000
>> 
>> Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>> 
>> >> From: Andrea Corallo <akrl@sdf.org>
>> >> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, emacs-devel@gnu.org
>> >> Date: Sat, 04 Dec 2021 19:22:02 +0000
>> >> 
>> >> I think it could be a good idea but I believe there's no need to use
>> >> macros here, we could have just functions return rvalues no?
>> >> 
>> >> I'm not a big fan of C macros and I try not to use them whem possible.
>> >
>> > Macros punish unoptimized builds less severely than functions.
>> 
>> Yep, but in this case I'm sure the perf delta is not measurable
>> therefore IMO functions should be preferred.
>
> I was responding to a much more general dislike of macros that you
> expressed above, and wanted to explain why we do use macros in Emacs.

I see, and understand why we use them, where we use them.

Actually I've got the explanation when I proposed a patch to remove them
some time ago :D :D And that's one reason why my phrase finished with
"when possible".

  Andrea