[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#61730: 30.0.50; Compiler warnings for delq and delete
From: |
Mattias Engdegård |
Subject: |
bug#61730: 30.0.50; Compiler warnings for delq and delete |
Date: |
Fri, 24 Feb 2023 14:43:34 +0100 |
> I think we should add compiler warnings
You rang?
> for `delete' and `delq' function
> calls whose return values are unused.
Let's experiment: warning about for-effect calls to
mapcar mapcan mapconcat
delq delete delete-dups delete-consecutive-dups
cl-delete cl-delete-if cl-delete-if-not cl-delete-duplicates
sort
results in 34 such calls found on master, most of them about `delq` and
`delete`, but `delete-dups`, `cl-delete`, `mapconcat` and `sort` are also
represented.
Some of these are no doubt safe, a few of them knowingly so, but it's
definitely not obvious from a quick look at the code. It's poor style in any
case.
Thus such a warning definitely falls on the beneficial side. Let's do it.
> I think the warnings could be added in a similar way as the "mapcar
> called for effect" warnings work.
That's probably the best place to start (although we prefer warnings to be
emitted by the front-end and not in codegen).
We may want to change the warning text from "called for effect" because it's
written from the perspective of the compiler; the programmer thinks of it as
'not using the return value'.
For that matter, `with-suppressed-warnings` doesn't work for suppressing this
warning very well; we may want to do something about that. This is true for the
existing `mapcar` warning as well.
> Adding the same kind of warning for `remq' and `remove' would probably
> also be useful. This will probably not occur that often but it still
> would be useful I think.
The compiler should already warn about those two since they are declared
side-effect-free. Unless somehow `byte-compile-delete-errors` is set during
compilation, which can happen if the code messes about with (optimise (safety
...)) -- it's a bit unfortunate. Please tell us if you observe anomalies in
this regard.
- bug#61730: 30.0.50; Compiler warnings for delq and delete, Michael Heerdegen, 2023/02/23
- bug#61730: 30.0.50; Compiler warnings for delq and delete, Richard Stallman, 2023/02/23
- bug#61730: 30.0.50; Compiler warnings for delq and delete,
Mattias Engdegård <=
- bug#61730: 30.0.50; Compiler warnings for delq and delete, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/02/24
- bug#61730: 30.0.50; Compiler warnings for delq and delete, Michael Heerdegen, 2023/02/24
- bug#61730: 30.0.50; Compiler warnings for delq and delete, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/02/24
- bug#61730: 30.0.50; Compiler warnings for delq and delete, Michael Heerdegen, 2023/02/24
- bug#61730: 30.0.50; Compiler warnings for delq and delete, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/02/24
- bug#61730: 30.0.50; Compiler warnings for delq and delete, Michael Heerdegen, 2023/02/24
- bug#61730: 30.0.50; Compiler warnings for delq and delete, Michael Heerdegen, 2023/02/24
- bug#61730: 30.0.50; Compiler warnings for delq and delete, Mattias Engdegård, 2023/02/24
- bug#61730: 30.0.50; Compiler warnings for delq and delete, Stefan Monnier, 2023/02/24
- bug#61730: 30.0.50; Compiler warnings for delq and delete, Mattias Engdegård, 2023/02/25