From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: EMACS_INT cleanup Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2010 09:47:41 +0200 Message-ID: <83r5gjtwf6.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83aan8uvy3.fsf@gnu.org> <8339t0uthi.fsf@gnu.org> <831v8kurwd.fsf@gnu.org> <83wrqctcha.fsf@gnu.org> <83vd5wtc7j.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1285314486 29258 80.91.229.12 (24 Sep 2010 07:48:06 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2010 07:48:06 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Sep 24 09:48:02 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Oz30g-0003Ci-BR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 24 Sep 2010 09:48:00 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58336 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Oz30b-0005Hd-F1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 24 Sep 2010 03:47:53 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=42352 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Oz30S-0005GN-GZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Sep 2010 03:47:45 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Oz30M-0003Zx-88 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Sep 2010 03:47:41 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il ([80.179.55.166]:35894) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Oz30M-0003Zl-1h for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Sep 2010 03:47:38 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0L9800E00QX6Y900@a-mtaout20.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Sep 2010 09:47:36 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([77.127.203.3]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0L9800EK4QZB2PC0@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Fri, 24 Sep 2010 09:47:36 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:130731 Archived-At: > From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen > Date: Fri, 24 Sep 2010 00:07:32 +0200 > > Do we want to allow strings to be more than 2GB big? IMO, definitely. Quite a few Emacs features make a string from buffer text and then put the string back. So if we don't support large strings, we have bugs waiting to happen. > There are as many int/EMACS_INT problems in that area as in the > buffer area Yes, fixed a few yesterday. > but it feels kinda... er... not very useful to fix up format3() to > allow format statements to be EMACS_INT clean. If you mean the %d vs %ld etc., then I don't think it's a frequent problem in Emacs sources. > I mean, it may be nice and orthogonal and stuff, but... I don't know. > And does using more longs on 64-bit machines than previously slow Emacs > down any? It shouldn't, the registers are 64-bit.