[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: :alnum: broken?

From: Marcin Borkowski
Subject: Re: :alnum: broken?
Date: Sun, 01 Mar 2020 23:41:21 +0100
User-agent: mu4e 1.1.0; emacs 27.0.50

On 2020-03-01, at 00:02, Andrea Corallo <address@hidden> wrote:

> 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.

Well, this probably means I'll have to change my habit, and the sooner
the better.

By the way, is the advice about using the byte-compiler (even if only
for the warnings) anywhere in the Elisp intro and/or the Elisp
reference?  Because I think it should be there, maybe even in both


Marcin Borkowski

reply via email to

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