From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Alan Mackenzie Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: scratch/accurate-warning-pos: Solid progress: the branch now bootstraps. Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2018 21:15:39 +0000 Message-ID: <20181127211539.GB4705@ACM> References: <20181125193050.GH27152@ACM> <2c2ae483-3309-f79d-07a5-30af1f49058b@cs.ucla.edu> <20181125212920.GK27152@ACM> <60ac9dfc-b540-89f9-68ea-ec7cceaa8511@cs.ucla.edu> <83in0kijz0.fsf@gnu.org> <9e216e61-7d95-94f0-cbee-593b4f32ced2@cs.ucla.edu> <20181126184359.GG4030@ACM> <55044caa-18fb-9e9a-81b4-3912f64d0aa4@cs.ucla.edu> <20181127074336.GA4705@ACM> <0ec5806a-0cc6-8b9f-6bc2-97875e36a511@cs.ucla.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1543354299 12176 195.159.176.226 (27 Nov 2018 21:31:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2018 21:31:39 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Mutt/1.10.1 (2018-07-13) Cc: michael_heerdegen@web.de, Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org, cpitclaudel@gmail.com, monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA To: Paul Eggert Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Nov 27 22:31:34 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1gRkxC-0002wM-K3 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 27 Nov 2018 22:31:34 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44633 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gRkzD-0002hj-U9 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 27 Nov 2018 16:33:39 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:40433) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gRklH-0007Uo-2O for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Nov 2018 16:19:16 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gRklB-0007Et-8J for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Nov 2018 16:19:15 -0500 Original-Received: from colin.muc.de ([193.149.48.1]:10032 helo=mail.muc.de) by eggs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gRklB-0007Dy-1I for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Nov 2018 16:19:09 -0500 Original-Received: (qmail 45812 invoked by uid 3782); 27 Nov 2018 21:19:07 -0000 Original-Received: from acm.muc.de (p2E5D5B5F.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [46.93.91.95]) by colin.muc.de (tmda-ofmipd) with ESMTP; Tue, 27 Nov 2018 22:19:04 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 30313 invoked by uid 1000); 27 Nov 2018 21:15:39 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <0ec5806a-0cc6-8b9f-6bc2-97875e36a511@cs.ucla.edu> X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/1.1.12 (Macallan) X-Primary-Address: acm@muc.de X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: FreeBSD 9.x [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 193.149.48.1 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:231459 Archived-At: Hello, Paul. On Tue, Nov 27, 2018 at 12:27:36 -0800, Paul Eggert wrote: > On 11/26/18 11:43 PM, Alan Mackenzie wrote: > > Emacs used to work OK on machines 10, 100 times slower than what we have today. > That was back before Emacs did things like automatic syntax highlighting. Today's Emacs would have been rejected for use on those older machines. > Alas, we cannot assume that single-threaded computation will continue to > improve at the same rate it improved in the past, as the single-threaded > performance-vs-time curve is flattening out. See, for example: > https://imgur.com/a/FVLjs That's all pretty much irrelevant to the task at hand. The fact is, Emacs users will be using computers of a wide range of power. Probably as much as a factor of 10. Compared with this, a 10%, or even a 20% slowdown, while not being good, will hardly be noticed. Anyhow, as far as creating a better solution than scratch/accurate-warning-pos goes, have you had any further thoughts? I've thought about the double interpreter idea, and must confess I've no idea how one might go about implementing it in any reasonable time. grep reveals approximately 6728 instances of EQ/NILP/SYMBOLP/XSYMBOL in 98 out of 132 .c files, and all of these instances are compiled in, rather than being function calls. Are you still serious about implementing this? -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).