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: Dynamic loading progress Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 10:37:55 -0800 Organization: UCLA Computer Science Department Message-ID: <56520B83.6070302@cs.ucla.edu> References: <8737w3qero.fsf@lifelogs.com> <831tbn9g9j.fsf@gnu.org> <878u5upw7o.fsf@lifelogs.com> <83ziya8xph.fsf@gnu.org> <83y4du80xo.fsf@gnu.org> <564E6081.9010805@cs.ucla.edu> <564E6352.20701@cs.ucla.edu> <564F86FF.6030202@cs.ucla.edu> <564FA768.40504@cs.ucla.edu> <5650FD75.5030707@cs.ucla.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1448217498 13788 80.91.229.3 (22 Nov 2015 18:38:18 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 22 Nov 2015 18:38:18 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Philipp Stephani , Eli Zaretskii , Ted Zlatanov , =?UTF-8?Q?Aur=c3=a9lien_Aptel?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Nov 22 19:38:08 2015 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 1a0ZWa-00064p-1E for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 22 Nov 2015 19:38:08 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57052 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a0ZWZ-00059O-Ra for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 22 Nov 2015 13:38:07 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53544) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a0ZWX-00059J-3j for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 22 Nov 2015 13:38:05 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a0ZWW-0004eP-9f for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 22 Nov 2015 13:38:05 -0500 Original-Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([131.179.128.68]:34738) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a0ZWS-0004e5-F0; Sun, 22 Nov 2015 13:38:00 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 90FE21601AA; Sun, 22 Nov 2015 10:37:59 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10032) with ESMTP id yj7BHuOVonhF; Sun, 22 Nov 2015 10:37:58 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id DCE641605AF; Sun, 22 Nov 2015 10:37:58 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at zimbra.cs.ucla.edu Original-Received: from zimbra.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (zimbra.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10026) with ESMTP id 3b_ps18jT5FJ; Sun, 22 Nov 2015 10:37:58 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from [192.168.1.9] (pool-100-32-155-148.lsanca.fios.verizon.net [100.32.155.148]) by zimbra.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id B4D471601AA; Sun, 22 Nov 2015 10:37:58 -0800 (PST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0 In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 131.179.128.68 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:195048 Archived-At: I'm not going to belabor the point. If you want to use sizes as version numbers it's not worth fighting over. If we ever change a function API without changing the structure layout, I guess we'll have to insert a dummy structure member to make the size grow. Sounds like a kludge, but there are worse kludges in Emacs. Getting back to the original issue, your worry was that a ptrdiff_t size would lead to unnecessary warnings. I didn't get any such warning when compiling this with gcc -Wall: #include ptrdiff_t size; int main (void) { return size < sizeof size; } I expect the warnings you're worried about occur when comparing an unknown ptrdiff_t with an unknown size_t; they should not occur when comparing an unknown ptrdiff_t with a size_t constant. If that's the case, let's leave it ptrdiff_t. And even if it's not the case, I'm inclined to leave it ptrdiff_t, as any module code will run into similar issues with the other ptrdiff_t components, so why make an exception for this one?