On 24 May 2018 at 12:50, João Távora <address@hidden> wrote:
> Nothing against this, but can anyone comment on the possiblity of
> recording actual position information in bytecomp.el, so we wouldn't
> have this limitation in the first place (and hence wouldn't need to
> document it)?
Considering Bug#24592, it seems a bit optimistic to expect useful
position information from the byte compiler
Doesn't seem like a huge showstopper though. That bug is about errors and warnings, whereas we want the position of the containing top-level form that originated the named function being compiled. That would be a considerable improvement already.
I think Michael's suggesting about `definition-name' could help. That
seems like something that should be mentioned in the elisp manual too,
somewhere.
I didn't fully understand it yet, but I will try that too.
Thanks