From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andrea Corallo Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#58318: 28.2; Emacs installed from package won't work with MinGW Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2022 14:35:15 +0000 Message-ID: References: <835ygxsdyu.fsf@gnu.org> <87zge9w049.fsf@gnus.org> <83k05dovwq.fsf@gnu.org> <87a667x3l4.fsf@gnus.org> <83edvjondh.fsf@gnu.org> <87sfjzvnyu.fsf@gnus.org> <837d1bomsv.fsf@gnu.org> <83wn9bn69q.fsf@gnu.org> <83tu4fn3rz.fsf@gnu.org> <83r0zjn31y.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="37234"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: larsi@gnus.org, corwin@bru.st, 58318@debbugs.gnu.org, bartosz.bubak@gmail.com To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Oct 07 17:32:19 2022 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 1ogpKk-0009S0-TE for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 07 Oct 2022 17:32:18 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59960 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ogpKk-0007TX-0b for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 07 Oct 2022 11:32:18 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:60708) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ogoSI-0005BE-Vv for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Oct 2022 10:36:03 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:37960) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ogoSI-0006nL-Hp for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Oct 2022 10:36:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ogoSI-0004VF-7O for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 07 Oct 2022 10:36:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Andrea Corallo Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2022 14:36:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 58318 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 58318-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B58318.166515332317262 (code B ref 58318); Fri, 07 Oct 2022 14:36:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 58318) by debbugs.gnu.org; 7 Oct 2022 14:35:23 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37038 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ogoRe-0004UM-K2 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 07 Oct 2022 10:35:22 -0400 Original-Received: from mx.sdf.org ([205.166.94.24]:58073) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1ogoRd-0004UE-9b for 58318@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 07 Oct 2022 10:35:21 -0400 Original-Received: from ma.sdf.org (ma.sdf.org [205.166.94.33]) by mx.sdf.org (8.15.2/8.14.5) with ESMTPS id 297EZF1D021324 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256 bits) verified NO); Fri, 7 Oct 2022 14:35:15 GMT In-Reply-To: <83r0zjn31y.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Fri, 07 Oct 2022 17:03:53 +0300") 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:244821 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> From: Andrea Corallo >> Cc: larsi@gnus.org, corwin@bru.st, bartosz.bubak@gmail.com, >> 58318@debbugs.gnu.org >> Date: Fri, 07 Oct 2022 13:54:05 +0000 >> >> > How much will performance suffer if we use funcall? >> >> This is the usual 1 milion dollar question, we can run benchmarks but we >> are never sure of how much realistic they are. That said IME this is >> one of the most effective optimizations we have, funcall is a non >> trivial and relatively slow machine when executed at each function >> activation. > > OK, then let's go for precompiling all the trampolines AOT. The only downside might be build time, compiling a trampoline is quick, 1000+ maybe not so much. Andrea