From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: building/using address-sanitizer-enabled emacs? Date: Mon, 08 May 2017 19:04:08 +0300 Message-ID: <83fugfcp3b.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83wp9scbwi.fsf@gnu.org> <83shkfct06.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1494259485 9615 195.159.176.226 (8 May 2017 16:04:45 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 8 May 2017 16:04:45 +0000 (UTC) Cc: jim@meyering.net, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Paul Eggert Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon May 08 18:04:38 2017 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 1d7l9J-0002M4-EU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 08 May 2017 18:04:37 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60295 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d7l9O-0000xe-TL for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 08 May 2017 12:04:42 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:60324) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d7l9G-0000wd-NH for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 08 May 2017 12:04:35 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d7l9D-0000YT-K6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 08 May 2017 12:04:34 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:54055) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1d7l9D-0000YP-Hh; Mon, 08 May 2017 12:04:31 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1745 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1d7l9C-0004JZ-Bg; Mon, 08 May 2017 12:04:31 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Paul Eggert on Mon, 8 May 2017 07:46:43 -0700) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e 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:214696 Archived-At: > Cc: jim@meyering.net, emacs-devel@gnu.org > From: Paul Eggert > Date: Mon, 8 May 2017 07:46:43 -0700 > > Still, it would make Emacs performance worse and as I understand it this > is the main reason this approach has not been incorporated thus far. No, the reason is that the decision has not yet been made. > > This limitation is exactly the reason why we will soon have to decide > > whether we merge the branch and start using it, improving what can be > > improved and living with that which cannot, or keep using unexec > Those are not the only two choices available to us. What are the alternatives?