From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#48264: [PATCH v3 15/15] Add and use BVAR_FIELD macros Date: Sun, 09 May 2021 11:10:33 +0300 Message-ID: <83im3s8gzq.fsf@gnu.org> References: <877dkbsj9d.fsf@catern.com> <20210506213346.9730-16-sbaugh@catern.com> <835yzudcvz.fsf@gnu.org> <87o8dmr96v.fsf@catern.com> <83tunebsiu.fsf@gnu.org> <87mtt6p6co.fsf@catern.com> <83sg2xaf4l.fsf@gnu.org> <87czu1pcv0.fsf@catern.com> <83a6p59vk6.fsf@gnu.org> <875yztoxnx.fsf@catern.com> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="21602"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, 48264@debbugs.gnu.org To: Spencer Baugh Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun May 09 10:11:24 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lfeX6-0005YT-DF for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 09 May 2021 10:11:24 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35240 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lfeX5-00012E-A0 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 09 May 2021 04:11:23 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42872) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lfeWk-0000kQ-IQ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 09 May 2021 04:11:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:43392) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lfeWk-0006RK-Bd for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 09 May 2021 04:11:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lfeWk-0008Gj-5H for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 09 May 2021 04:11:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 09 May 2021 08:11:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 48264 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 48264-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B48264.162054784331777 (code B ref 48264); Sun, 09 May 2021 08:11:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 48264) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 May 2021 08:10:43 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:54937 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lfeWQ-0008GT-UD for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 09 May 2021 04:10:43 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:60740) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1lfeWP-0008GN-HZ for 48264@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 09 May 2021 04:10:41 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:55700) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lfeWJ-0006Bj-KE; Sun, 09 May 2021 04:10:35 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:2450 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lfeWI-00075Z-Kh; Sun, 09 May 2021 04:10:35 -0400 In-Reply-To: <875yztoxnx.fsf@catern.com> (message from Spencer Baugh on Sat, 08 May 2021 15:03:46 -0400) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:206046 Archived-At: > From: Spencer Baugh > Cc: 48264@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Sat, 08 May 2021 15:03:46 -0400 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > >> From: Spencer Baugh > >> Cc: 48264@debbugs.gnu.org > >> Date: Sat, 08 May 2021 09:35:31 -0400 > >> If you think such a conditionally-compiled runtime check would be > >> acceptable for applying these changes, I can go ahead and write that. > > > > Yes, I think so. But if Lars or Stefan think differently, I might > > reconsider. > > In the process of implementing the runtime check, I, of course, came up > with a better compile-time check. How about this? LGTM, thanks. But could you please run your benchmarks again, with this implementation, to make sure we still get only a 1 - 2% slowdown at worst? I wouldn't expect the addition to matter in an optimized build, but just to be sure...