From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Paul Eggert Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Windows 64 port Date: Wed, 29 Feb 2012 22:28:49 -0800 Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department Message-ID: <4F4F1721.6060201@cs.ucla.edu> References: <20120219211800.0000558f@unknown> <834numv7js.fsf@gnu.org> <4F428780.8070902@cs.ucla.edu> <4F4D507F.7030008@cs.ucla.edu> <83obshcy8n.fsf@gnu.org> <4F4E7FE0.9040907@cs.ucla.edu> <83d38xcoyt.fsf@gnu.org> <4F4EEE4D.4030706@cs.ucla.edu> <83aa41c6hq.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1330583360 28183 80.91.229.3 (1 Mar 2012 06:29:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 1 Mar 2012 06:29:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ajmr@ilovetortilladepatatas.com, fabrice.popineau@supelec.fr, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Mar 01 07:29:19 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1S2zVv-0000Du-2g for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 01 Mar 2012 07:29:19 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35956 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S2zVu-0005NH-FW for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 01 Mar 2012 01:29:18 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:42527) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S2zVZ-0004zG-PQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Mar 2012 01:29:17 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S2zVY-0005se-1K for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 01 Mar 2012 01:28:57 -0500 Original-Received: from smtp.cs.ucla.edu ([131.179.128.62]:57842) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1S2zVU-0005oz-2Y; Thu, 01 Mar 2012 01:28:52 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2DC70A60004; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 22:28:49 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at smtp.cs.ucla.edu Original-Received: from smtp.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 9SpKilANEwAC; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 22:28:47 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.10] (pool-71-189-109-235.lsanca.fios.verizon.net [71.189.109.235]) by smtp.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DBBDB39E8007; Wed, 29 Feb 2012 22:28:47 -0800 (PST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2 In-Reply-To: <83aa41c6hq.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 131.179.128.62 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:148848 Archived-At: On 02/29/2012 08:03 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > There's nothing bogus about using the right data type But the code in question is already using a correct data type. That is, for the diffs marked "Not needed for Windows 64" in , Emacs is already using data types that work, both on mainstream platforms and on Windows 64. > or declare a variable or an argument `const' when it is. Suppose someone proposed lots of patches like this: - size_t len = strlen (string); + size_t const len = strlen (string); on the grounds that the XYZ Corp. compiler warns whenever code fails to use 'const' at every opportunity. That would be bogus -- that's not the Emacs programming style, and we shouldn't slavishly alter mainstream code merely to pacify a third-party compiler that prefers a different style. > I asked several times to do the same for texinfo.tex when you sync with > gnulib, and you declined. Those patches were automatically merged from an already-debugged and well-modularized upstream, and it's trivial to see which parts affect texinfo.tex. In contrast, here we're dealing with a handwritten patch that is tickling core Emacs internals in tricky, low-level ways, a patch that almost surely still contains bugs, partly because it is trying to do too much at once. It's entirely appropriate to spend more time with such a patch, to see which parts are really needed for Windows 64, and to isolate the changes as much as possible to the Windows-specific code base.