Re: Lisp watchpoints

[Noam Postavsky]

On Sun, Nov 29, 2015 at 3:45 PM, Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> wrote:
>> Date: Sun, 29 Nov 2015 15:35:24 -0500
>> From: Noam Postavsky <address@hidden>
>> Cc: Stefan Monnier <address@hidden>, John Wiegley <address@hidden>, 
>> address@hidden
>>
>> Would it help if I added a WATCHER_NUMBER_LIMIT to the enum after
>> WATCHER_NUMBER_SET_REDISPLAY and used that instead?
>
> Yes, thanks.  (WATCHER_NUMBER_LAST sounds a better name to me, but
> that's nitpicking.)

The thing I don't like about LAST (or MAX) is that it implies it's a
valid number, when it isn't.

>
>> If window.c would be in charge of defining
>> set-redisplay-internal-watcher-number, then it would need to know the
>> right number, which would probably mean moving the
>> WATCHER_NUMBER_SET_REDISPLAY definition to a header file away from the
>> watcher_table definition
>
> Yes, that's what I had in mind.
>
>> which would be suboptimal, I think.
>
> But then data.c will forever be doomed to export all the other watcher
> numbers, utterly unrelated to it.  I think this would be worse.  Code
> should live where its natural home is, even if that means to have some
> declarations in a header.

Hmm, okay. Header it is then.