Return-Path: X-Original-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org Delivered-To: notmuch@notmuchmail.org Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 79054431FD2 for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2012 02:35:53 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: Debian amavisd-new at olra.theworths.org X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: 0 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[none] autolearn=disabled Received: from olra.theworths.org ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (olra.theworths.org [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jIYDZLlDKy2P for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2012 02:35:52 -0800 (PST) Received: from guru.guru-group.fi (guru-group.fi [87.108.86.66]) by olra.theworths.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 975D2431FBC for ; Wed, 25 Jan 2012 02:35:52 -0800 (PST) Received: by guru.guru-group.fi (Postfix, from userid 501) id 0028C68056; Wed, 25 Jan 2012 12:35:55 +0200 (EET) From: Tomi Ollila To: David Edmondson , Tomi Ollila , notmuch@notmuchmail.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] emacs: Fix a notmuch-print.el compiler warning. In-Reply-To: References: <1327481535-27076-1-git-send-email-dme@dme.org> User-Agent: Notmuch/0.11+99~g0528eb4 (http://notmuchmail.org) Emacs/23.3.1 (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) X-Face: HhBM'cA~ MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailman-Approved-At: Thu, 02 Feb 2012 08:56:32 -0800 X-BeenThere: notmuch@notmuchmail.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.13 Precedence: list List-Id: "Use and development of the notmuch mail system." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 25 Jan 2012 10:35:53 -0000 On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 09:24:46 +0000, David Edmondson wrote: > On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 11:19:30 +0200, Tomi Ollila wrote: > > On Wed, 25 Jan 2012 08:52:15 +0000, David Edmondson wrote: > > > `notmuch-show-get-prop' should be declared. > > > --- > > > > How 'bout > > > > (require 'notmuch-lib) > > > > and put that declare-function there ? > > > > So that when declaration gets checked when notmuch-show defuns it > > That doesn't work, as I recall. A `declare-function' in a `require'd > file has no effect - the compiler will still complain. Ok +1 I (might) check how check-declare can be used here... Tomi