Re: please consider emacs-unicode for pervasive changes

["Stefan Monnier" <monnier+gnu/emacs@rum.cs.yale.edu>]

> If you want to improve the GC (which would be very useful) what's the
> reason for not trying the Boehm collector, as TODO suggests?  The
> ex-Harlequin Memory Pool System has been released since then, but as
> far as I remember it doesn't currently have a suitable licence and I
> don't know whether it would be worth considering practically, in
> contrast to Boehm's.

From the very limited experiment done in the XEmacs camp it seems
that the result is slow.  It's not quite clear why and how much work
would be necessary to tune it to something acceptable, but I maybe
it's got something to do with "very fast cons-cell allocation".

> > I've assumed that when I start work on a Guile branch, I'd be
> > responsible for dealing with merges in both directions and all the
> > coordination that implies.
> 
> Well, I'll give up at that stage.

I think Dave is right in trying to make people aware of the problem
and that the merging should not be blindly always imposed on the same
side.  There should be enough cooperation that the merge is done by
the people who can do it most easily (and thus reliably) and that
depends on the actual change.

In the case of a rename (or other changes like the ones done for Guile),
the one making the change is better prepared to apply it to other branches
because understanding the code that's changed is not really
necessary.

Maybe Ken should base its work on the emacs-unicode branch so it
doesn't need to worry about another branch.


	Stefan