Re: Did `inline' used to do something else?

[Emanuel Berg]

Michael Heerdegen wrote:

>> ;;; byte-compile optimizers to support
>> inlining (put 'inline 'byte-optimizer
>> 'byte-optimize-inline-handler) Followed by
>> a definition of
>> `byte-optimize-inline-handler'. There's no
>> mention of the symbol property
>> `byte-optimizer' [...]
>
> That property is referenced by
> `byte-optimize-form' (in "byte-opt.el").
> Also see the flag `byte-optimize'.

(require 'bytecomp)
(get 'push   'byte-compile) ; nil, i.e. no special treatment

;; sort of special treatment
(get 'car    'byte-compile) ; byte-compile-one-arg
(get 'aref   'byte-compile) ; byte-compile-two-args

;; very special (specific) treatment
(get 'progn  'byte-compile) ; byte-compile-progn
(get 'inline 'byte-compile) ; byte-compile-progn

But specific as it might be, there is no
distinction between `inline' and `progn'
visible here. Does `get' even get the
difference or are the two last lines identical
as far as it is concerned?

When is an alias an alias and when is it what
is being aliased?

I think this is only confusing... an alias
should be another way of referring to something
as a convenience, nothing more. Well, hell.

-- 
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573