From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: master d582356: * src/fns.c (Frandom): Handle bignum `limit`s Date: Sun, 07 Mar 2021 19:47:29 +0200 Message-ID: <834khmua8e.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20210305170955.27732.27579@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20210305170957.AF99920E1B@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <83sg58wu0v.fsf@gnu.org> <83k0qkwnwt.fsf@gnu.org> <838s70wdb5.fsf@gnu.org> <83a6rft5z9.fsf@gnu.org> <837dmjt2e2.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="29915"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Pip Cet Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Mar 07 18:49:06 2021 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1lIxWc-0007f3-7V for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 07 Mar 2021 18:49:06 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39168 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lIxWb-0004Tg-8P for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 07 Mar 2021 12:49:05 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:33356) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lIxVD-0003k9-61 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 07 Mar 2021 12:47:39 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:33000) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lIxVC-00088J-Q6; Sun, 07 Mar 2021 12:47:38 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:2525 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1lIxVC-0001Je-50; Sun, 07 Mar 2021 12:47:38 -0500 In-Reply-To: (message from Pip Cet on Sun, 7 Mar 2021 17:23:04 +0000) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:266139 Archived-At: > From: Pip Cet > Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2021 17:23:04 +0000 > Cc: Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org > > > > > How do you know which functions to tag? > > > > > > That's the part I wasn't volunteering for :-) We'd have to do that > > > manually, but we wouldn't have to do it all at once. > > I don't see how we can do that, without some methodical procedure. > > Incrementally? What does this mean in practice, though? Do you try tagging one function after another, or do you have some guidelines which ones to tag and which not to tag? > > > But usually there will already be a comment in those functions > > > explaining that they must not call GC, right? > > No, I think these are rare exceptions rather than the rule. > > So we can cover these rare exceptions, at least, converting an > ambiguous and hard-to-grep comment into an unambiguous macro > invocation? I don't really see the cons, though it's not as great as > automatic tagging of functions would be... Maybe there are no cons, but there are also no pro's: covering a small fraction of the problem means the problem is still with us.