Re: tramp-compat-funcall -> compat-funcall?

[Ted Zlatanov]

On Sat, 24 Sep 2016 09:57:32 -0400 Stefan Monnier <address@hidden> wrote: 

>>> There's  (if (fboundp '<foo>) (<foo> <bar>))  already (which is much
>> Your code snippet misses the `with-no-warnings' umbrella.

SM> No, it doesn't: the byte-compiler understands the the if+fboundp means
SM> that any call to this function in the branch is "safe" and it won't
SM> signal a warning.  That's my point.

I didn't know that. Thanks for explaining. I think the Gnus function
`gnus-funcall-no-warning' can be safely removed then? It's only in three
places, so it's an easy fix, but I want to check in case I missed something.

Ted