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: Suppressing native compilation (short and long term) Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2022 21:51:27 +0300 Message-ID: <83mtaeys7k.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87bkqxf1ij.fsf@tethera.net> <8335c9dkyf.fsf@gnu.org> <83edvqafr7.fsf@gnu.org> <87fsg6m5zx.fsf@trouble.defaultvalue.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="23446"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: tomas@tuxteam.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Rob Browning Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Oct 02 20:53:30 2022 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 1of45h-0005yq-5Y for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 02 Oct 2022 20:53:29 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33040 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1of45g-0003B6-4a for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 02 Oct 2022 14:53:28 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41666) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1of43r-0001Bu-Kr for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 02 Oct 2022 14:51:35 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:59810) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1of43r-0000w8-6c; Sun, 02 Oct 2022 14:51:35 -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=NUR2vY99wdIrs0YHzLpULvseKrdhsrtC1+6kz+xoWrI=; b=dQMJYnGwlS2+ 5XWwOHG+pyakrTZeyhseAA5eNNhm+NvpFGpHipfAsApjnsp5Q9wHadSreZZqDAohJin74LQoC6jVk jXZCQTvolAUCeebknvf+0h2xn1U3xDaBgXrfPJDdL6O/4mvxin2me01rXHZzxVoAQxSCH8rMJW0Qm c4RpQsrfQEyWLwKuorVshsm/qm6rBl7G0MEtQSU+f/sL4Op1l+QFEHYzSsQG6z24gr7/hte6s/K/a 8T7Ed5TT9EAM3O5u7vLVs13gh2xXxlcZrQwY9iXSviBcAy7uiTh9Iv4RggLXaZThv+7iG212oTNVR 3MxY67s42bmhDx4LinDUUw==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (port=1458 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1of43q-0007VK-HU; Sun, 02 Oct 2022 14:51:34 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87fsg6m5zx.fsf@trouble.defaultvalue.org> (message from Rob Browning on Sun, 02 Oct 2022 13:32:02 -0500) 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:296686 Archived-At: > From: Rob Browning > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2022 13:32:02 -0500 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > My recommendation is to use the default JIT manner until and unless > > actual problems are reported by users. > > [...] > > > There's no profit, IME. There are only disadvantages: you are in > > effect fighting against the Emacs defaults, for reasons that are > > purely theoretical. > > If I understand your meaning in both of these cases, I'll just note that > for the things we've been discussing here, I believe we've already had > complaints/requests from Debian users. Whether that's significant > enough to warrant accommodation is another question, but that may not > leave the concerns theoretical, strictly speaking. Please try to understand the nature of the complaints. It is quite possible that users simply use the (broken) analogy with the *.elc files, because they misunderstand the quantitatively new aspects of native-compilation. There's more here than meets the eye, as has been demonstrated even in this discussion. Please don't hesitate to involve us in these discussions with your complaining users, if you think we could help. > And for what it's worth, I can see both sides of the argument(s), i.e. I > can understand why upstream, it could be that on balance, those concerns > won't (and maybe shouldn't) be considered sufficient when balanced > against other considerations. One other aspect that should be kept in mind is complexity. The introduction of the pdumper file in Emacs 27 and of native compilation in Emacs 28 made Emacs deployment and startup code significantly more complex, and as a side effect invalidated some of the deployment methods people used to use, like some "clever" symlinking of the binaries or the directories. We are still learning these consequences (although some of them already caused fixes in the code). In this situation, adding even more possible deployment method that upstream should support risks making the startup code a maintenance burden.