From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Prickliness of the "invalid byte code" stuff Date: Wed, 19 Jun 2019 19:08:37 +0300 Message-ID: <83sgs5r20q.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87tvcq9b0w.fsf@igel.home> <83v9x2svmf.fsf@gnu.org> <83fto6sphn.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="117785"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: eggert@cs.ucla.edu, rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jun 19 18:20:05 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hddJd-000UWW-41 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Jun 2019 18:20:05 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40148 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hddJb-0007Ck-14 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 19 Jun 2019 12:20:03 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:55060) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hdd9T-0003Jg-Rh for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 19 Jun 2019 12:09:36 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:40727) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hdd9S-0007rX-9d; Wed, 19 Jun 2019 12:09:34 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=1462 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1hdd8l-0006IO-SW; Wed, 19 Jun 2019 12:08:55 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Stefan Monnier on Tue, 18 Jun 2019 15:48:30 -0400) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:237915 Archived-At: > From: Stefan Monnier > Cc: eggert@cs.ucla.edu, rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2019 15:48:30 -0400 > > >> A `grep byte-compile-dynamic: **/*.el` seems to indicate it's currently > >> used in 12 files bundled with Emacs. > > Any idea why those 12 use it? > > I think in the 20th century, the performance difference could be > measured (at least in benchmarks, tho maybe also in actual use), but > I seriously doubt it makes a noticeable difference on machines of this > century (not sure if it's because of changes in hardware such as > available RAM or CPU speed, or because the growth of the rest of > Emacs dwarfs those effects, or what). I understand, but I was curious why these 12 files do use the variable, while all the rest don't. IOW, what is (or was) so special about these files? I think I'd like to wait with the decision until we hear the emacsspeak results. I expect that the effect on the memory will be minor, even in a package _all_ of whose files use this variable. If that is indeed so, I think we can disable the variable.