[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: gnus/html2text.el
From: |
Luc Teirlinck |
Subject: |
Re: gnus/html2text.el |
Date: |
Tue, 26 Oct 2004 22:24:20 -0500 (CDT) |
Stefan Monnier wrote:
Nice theory. And next thing you know reality strikes:
when you modify code do you first remove all "with-no-warnings", recompile,
check the output and then put the with-no-warnings back in?
Depends. If the code change is trivial, I would just be extra careful
inside the `with-no-warnings'. If it is extensive, I would indeed
temporarily remove the `with-no-warnings'. But the latter should very
rarely happen: `with-no-warnings' is not supposed to cover a large
chunk of code anyway.
How substantive a change is one going to make to
`(with-no-warnings (beginning-of-buffer))'?
I believe that a much bigger problem is that many people do not pay
any attention to compiler warnings.
If one runs `make bootstrap' one gets an endless litany of one
compiler warning after the other, that no one apparently ever paid any
attention to.
Sincerely,
Luc.
- gnus/html2text.el, Luc Teirlinck, 2004/10/24
- Re: gnus/html2text.el, Reiner Steib, 2004/10/25
- Re: gnus/html2text.el, Richard Stallman, 2004/10/26
- Re: gnus/html2text.el, Stefan Monnier, 2004/10/26
- Re: gnus/html2text.el, Kim F. Storm, 2004/10/26
- Re: gnus/html2text.el, Stefan Monnier, 2004/10/26
- Re: gnus/html2text.el, Luc Teirlinck, 2004/10/26
- Re: gnus/html2text.el, Stefan Monnier, 2004/10/26
- Re: gnus/html2text.el,
Luc Teirlinck <=
- Re: gnus/html2text.el, Luc Teirlinck, 2004/10/26
- Re: gnus/html2text.el, Miles Bader, 2004/10/26
- Re: gnus/html2text.el, Richard Stallman, 2004/10/27
Re: gnus/html2text.el, Luc Teirlinck, 2004/10/26
Re: gnus/html2text.el, Luc Teirlinck, 2004/10/26