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

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2021 09:31:05 +0000
> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
> From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>
> 
> Hello, Eli.
> 
> On Sat, Nov 27, 2021 at 07:53:36 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > > Date: Fri, 26 Nov 2021 19:56:21 +0000
> > > From: Alan Mackenzie <acm@muc.de>
> 
> > > A _LOT_ of these comparisons were for NILP, which is just #defined as EQ
> > > (arg, Qnil).  However if NILP were to be defined directly as arg ==
> > > Qnil, it would bypass the overhead in EQ.
> 
> > How can you use == when the operands could be structures?
> 
> I meant that NILP will be implemented as a binary comparison against
> zero, omitting the awkward test for symbols_with_position_enabled.

Please don't write code that assumes Qnil is zero.  (Or maybe I still
misunderstand what exactly you mean by the above.)