Small changes

* Makefile: add git-blame as a candidate to the byte-compilation. Change the function to call to byte-compile.

---
 contrib/emacs/Makefile |    4 ++--
 1 files changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

index 350846d..8554e39 100644
@@ -2,7 +2,7 @@
 
 EMACS = emacs
 
-ELC = git.elc vc-git.elc
+ELC = git.elc vc-git.elc git-blame.elc
 INSTALL ?= install
 INSTALL_ELC = $(INSTALL) -m 644
 prefix ?= $(HOME)

@@ -15,6 +15,6 @@ install: all
 	$(INSTALL_ELC) $(ELC) $(emacsdir)
 
 %.elc: %.el
-	$(EMACS) --batch --eval '(byte-compile-file "$<")'
+	$(EMACS) -batch -f batch-byte-compile $<
 
 clean:; rm -f $(ELC)

1.5.0

Could we have a bit more detailed description on the latter change?

Explaining why something needed a change is the point of a commit log message. Summarizing what got changed and how is good but that is secondary, because anybody can see that you changed the handcrafted --eval to -f by running "git show", even if you did not have the above proposed log message.

What is left unsaid is _why_ it is better to use single dash form of "-batch" and -f form instead of handcrafted --eval, and the proposed log message does not clarify the reason.

From: Junio C Hamano <[email protected]>

Could we have a bit more detailed description on the latter change?

Sure.

byte-compile-file is an interactive function.
batch--byte-compile is a batch function.

First function would be (better) called when using emacs in its "interactive" form -ie. M-x byte-compile-file RET.

batch-byte-compile is reserved for batching use (no interaction with the user).

So in non interactive mode, this is prefered way to do things.

Explaining why something needed a change is the point of a commit log message. Summarizing what got changed and how is good but that is secondary, because anybody can see that you changed the handcrafted --eval to -f by running "git show", even if you did not have the above proposed log message.

Sorry Iam not "good" at commit log :/

What is left unsaid is _why_ it is better to use single dash form of "-batch" and -f form instead of handcrafted --eval, and the proposed log message does not clarify the reason.

First reason is given by C-h f batch-byte-compile RET which gives:

batch-byte-compile is an autoloaded Lisp function in `bytecomp'. (batch-byte-compile &optional noforce)

Run byte-compile-file' on the files remaining on the command line. Use this from the command line, with -batch';
it won't work in an interactive Emacs.
Each file is processed even if an error occurred previously. For example, invoke "emacs -batch -f batch-byte-compile $emacs/ ~/*.el". If noforce is non-nil, don't recompile a file that seems to be

Second reason is "by habit" :)

Hope Ihave been clear. If you want me to submit something again from these patches, please tell how to do so (and modify what Ihave changed).

Xavier

Thanks. Received your other message and will apply.