GNU bug report logs - #25088
25.1; feature-unload and reload of cl-defstruct fails

Previous Next

Full log

Message #8 received at 25088 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: npostavs <at> users.sourceforge.net
Cc: 25088 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#25088: 25.1; feature-unload and reload of cl-defstruct fails
Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2016 10:13:44 +0200

> From: npostavs <at> users.sourceforge.net
> Date: Fri, 02 Dec 2016 00:24:04 -0500
> 
> Running
> 
>     emacs -Q -l bug-struct-reload.el --eval "(unload-feature 'bug-struct-reload)" -l bug-struct-reload.el
> 
> Where bug-struct-reload.el contains
> 
>     (eval-when-compile (require 'cl-lib))
>     (cl-defstruct foo f1)
>     (provide 'bug-struct-reload)
> 
> Shows in *Messages* the following error
> 
>     Unexpected element (define-type . foo) in load-history
>     Compiler-macro error for foo-p: (void-function foo-p--cmacro) [2 times]
> 
> This is because cl-defstruct defines the field accessors before the
> predicate.  After calling `feature-unload', the `macro-compiler' symbol
> property remains on the predicate even though the function itself is
> undefined.  Then when reloading, the compiler tries to call the
> predicate's compiler-macro to inline it in the accessor function, and
> fails to find the definition.
> 
> Since this is a regression in 25.1, I'd like to apply the following
> patch to emacs-25, which simply puts the predicate definition before the
> accessor functions.

How risky is this change?  cl-defstruct is a very widely used macro,
whereas unload-feature is a relatively obscure feature.  Is it really
worth fixing the (IMO minor) error and risking to break Emacs 25.2?

I don't have an intuition I can trust in these matters, so I need you
and others who do to offer their opinions, after carefully considering
the pros and cons.

Thanks.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.