bug#17498: 24.4.50; This function has a compiler macro `yes--cmacro'.

[Leo Liu]

On 2014-05-15 15:43 -0400, Stefan Monnier wrote:
> Pretty much, yes.  That's because the compiler macro is likely to be
> needed/useful while compiling the rest of the file (before it gets
> loaded).

But this is different from emacs 22 and 23. And it looks
counter-intuitive. I would expect macro expansion not to do much other
than transforming the code passed in. So I am curious is current
behaviour due to the byte-compiler i.e. if we don't do it this way it
won't work?

Thanks,
Leo