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: Shrinking the C core Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2023 15:22:45 +0300 Message-ID: <83bkf0vb3e.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20230809094655.793FC18A4654@snark.thyrsus.com> <875y5bdutt.fsf@dataswamp.org> <87y1i6e1uh.fsf@localhost> <874jkub40o.fsf@dataswamp.org> <87jztqdw2l.fsf@localhost> <87msym9i4r.fsf@dataswamp.org> <877cpp914t.fsf@localhost> <83fs4dwwdo.fsf@gnu.org> <874jkt90a5.fsf@localhost> <87y1i57jqi.fsf@localhost> <87pm3h7h8k.fsf@localhost> <87h6ot7cf3.fsf@localhost> <87edjx7c0b.fsf@localhost> <831qfxw2cx.fsf@gnu.org> <87v8d95918.fsf@localhost> <83y1i4vfgl.fsf@gnu.org> <87a5ukfw2j.fsf@localhost> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="20739"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: ams@gnu.org, incal@dataswamp.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Ihor Radchenko , Andrea Corallo Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Aug 21 14:22:56 2023 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 1qY3vs-000568-Bl for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2023 14:22:56 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qY3vS-0006uc-Or; Mon, 21 Aug 2023 08:22:30 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qY3vR-0006uF-2Z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2023 08:22:29 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qY3vQ-0000mT-01; Mon, 21 Aug 2023 08:22:28 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=43/6g27CjzhPOuxaXQiZEuZTGGFd+7g4ncon88Ym6F8=; b=kd4RrEFo6SH3 xd1W8oDTRuoD6AOFj2ScvcZcxKIK2eiXmXpxlfjXDSZF2Xxg/s3Nc2Ti06ioQGN/LR1SFrjq/9gYq MhfJ3grHgWHyQ0srLNwFEWEPw7Id0ARcJO3L2l9a/yMN5Dy3TlAcFXSxK5lGbsQlJVDHBUCAahPne je0L0/KLnLWRuj3FLXsbLXuzW1si33rpWy0MvGVrBlEzsgi3Mg54V084dTFTSLmS4d6uPIUhbtiLg H0ihw3HAszk8x2+ZHYncePaMAFgW8GyytOWskuPfA+eOsbLMHJ3w4Kok2S/VdFqE2dNS/iho++n0B i/IrqsTEIa+o8GijpkPqPw==; In-Reply-To: <87a5ukfw2j.fsf@localhost> (message from Ihor Radchenko on Mon, 21 Aug 2023 11:56:20 +0000) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:309069 Archived-At: > From: Ihor Radchenko > Cc: ams@gnu.org, incal@dataswamp.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2023 11:56:20 +0000 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > >> (let ((a 10)) > >> (setq a (+ a 100)) > >> (floor a nil)) > >> > >> During compilation of the above code, the compiler will know that a is a > >> positive integer. > > > > It will? What happens if a overflows? > > It will not, right? Because we do know all the values at compile time in > the above example. In toy programs, perhaps. But not in real life. We want to be able to write real-life programs in Lisp, not just toy ones. > > If you want to program in C or Fortran, then program in C or Fortran. > > Lisp is an interpreted environment that traditionally includes safety > > nets. People actually complain to us, and rightfully so, when Emacs > > crashes or produces corrupted results instead if signaling an error > > pointing out invalid input or other run-time problems. > > I did not mean to disable checks. I just meant that when the types and > possibly value ranges are known at compile time, these checks can be > safely omitted. Without compromising safety. Not in ELisp, they cannot. Someone already explained why.