From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Luc Teirlinck Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Current CVS doesn't bootstrap Date: Sat, 6 Nov 2004 19:25:35 -0600 (CST) Message-ID: <200411070125.iA71PZx00083@raven.dms.auburn.edu> References: <01c4c3f3$Blat.v2.2.2$7e8aa060@zahav.net.il> <01c4c41c$Blat.v2.2.2$0fa338a0@zahav.net.il> <200411062248.iA6MmEm29919@raven.dms.auburn.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1099790829 11732 80.91.229.6 (7 Nov 2004 01:27:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 7 Nov 2004 01:27:09 +0000 (UTC) Cc: eliz@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Nov 07 02:26:57 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1CQbpZ-0004o1-00 for ; Sun, 07 Nov 2004 02:26:57 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CQbxq-0001Wo-8F for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 06 Nov 2004 20:35:30 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CQbxW-0001Ts-Jh for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Nov 2004 20:35:10 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1CQbxS-0001S6-OE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Nov 2004 20:35:07 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1CQbxS-0001Rk-DL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 06 Nov 2004 20:35:06 -0500 Original-Received: from [131.204.53.104] (helo=manatee.dms.auburn.edu) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1CQboj-0006E9-He; Sat, 06 Nov 2004 20:26:05 -0500 Original-Received: from raven.dms.auburn.edu (raven.dms.auburn.edu [131.204.53.29]) by manatee.dms.auburn.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id iA71Q4Fu014345; Sat, 6 Nov 2004 19:26:05 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: (from teirllm@localhost) by raven.dms.auburn.edu (8.11.7p1+Sun/8.11.7) id iA71PZx00083; Sat, 6 Nov 2004 19:25:35 -0600 (CST) X-Authentication-Warning: raven.dms.auburn.edu: teirllm set sender to teirllm@dms.auburn.edu using -f Original-To: schwab@suse.de In-reply-to: (message from Andreas Schwab on Sun, 07 Nov 2004 01:35:57 +0100) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:29495 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:29495 Andreas Schwab wrote: Alternatively, we could implement an option that tells load to ignore *.elc files that are out of date and load the *.el file instead. This would actually be a change that would be far more drastic and general than the two alternatives. Its effect would not be limited to bootstrapping. I believe we discussed this before and the reasons for not doing so still remain valid. If I make changes to a .el file, then at a given moment I have to save these to disk. But that does not mean that the file is ready for use. It only is when I compile and take a look at what the compiler has to say. Also, it could lead to a slowdown in the functions in the file, which might be confusing to the user, who might not know that the .el file is being used. Moreover, if a .el file is newer than the .elc file, then I _believe_ that the present version of make bootstrap _already_ recompiles anyway. (It is a long time ago that I did a `make bootstrap' without a prior `make maintainer-clean', however.) I believe that your proposed solution would not help with some of the most common problems that arise with the current version of `make bootstrap' (without prior `make maintainer-clean'). One of these is changes in byte compilation. Another problem (that can lead to very confusing results) is if you make changes to a bunch of files, revert the changes and forget to manually recompile some of the reverted files. Now the out of date .elc files are _newer_ than the source files and thus are not out of date in as far as the computer is concerned. Sincerely, Luc.