Re: "simplifications"

[David Kastrup]

Miles Bader <address@hidden> writes:

> David Kastrup <address@hidden> writes:
>> Personally, I think that we should make the byte compiler optimize the
>> unnecessary binding away.
>
> It'd be nice if it did, though you need to analyze the function to make
> sure there are no hidden uses of that binding; in particular, you need
> to know if any functions called inside the defsubst might use the
> dynamic binding of the defsubst's args.
>
> [I personally think that's a bit silly, and that it would be enough to
> just define defsubst as not guaranteeing dynamic bindings of its args,
> but as a recall, this has been discussed before, and the current
> behavior declared necessary...]

My recollection was rather that optimizing such cases (for a suitable
definition of "such") was deemed a good idea, but too invasive for the
Emacs 22 release schedule.

-- 
David Kastrup