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: Larger GC thresholds for non-interactive Emacs Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2022 10:37:16 +0300 Message-ID: <83zgi3espf.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83bkuursya.fsf@gnu.org> <87h74l9jk8.fsf@localhost> <83bkutqb3z.fsf@gnu.org> <9778F176-E724-4E61-B0FB-327BCDD316C0@acm.org> <87sfo4epeo.fsf@localhost> <87bkurrc5e.fsf@localhost> <87bkur72b7.fsf@gnus.org> <874k0j40e7.fsf@gnus.org> <871qvm16he.fsf@gnus.org> <83a6aanm5j.fsf@gnu.org> <87o7yozzj0.fsf@gnus.org> <83k098kg6c.fsf@gnu.org> <8335fvg8kz.fsf@gnu.org> <87pmizrgoi.fsf@localhost> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="3039"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: owinebar@gmail.com, larsi@gnus.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, mattiase@acm.org, theophilusx@gmail.com, rms@gnu.org, acm@muc.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Ihor Radchenko Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Jun 23 09:38:31 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 1o4HQ6-0000bu-Td for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 23 Jun 2022 09:38:30 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55642 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o4HQ5-0004GL-LV for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 23 Jun 2022 03:38:29 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:51774) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o4HP8-0003Xr-Pv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 23 Jun 2022 03:37:30 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:36708) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o4HP7-0004aR-IV; Thu, 23 Jun 2022 03:37:29 -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=oVVGyYTz6jBnmhNLMQwzgto1l0X4zGI1ZV9X+IDUysg=; b=e2Ew8D+lXDeV BlQmOZPw0wxdK7MGmHn5oEwj/ZtYrJXQZEi12qyh5tBqDjsFmuFlbgfTJ6Rj0R8UZGOHZHaoDQ9RX a8wcUyiZ9j1UcMaMIUrY/kqmrBjA655Tz31GEgnKPW2O03BxDqgDrH7yIcFRqXmI/oVhh3y/LyHPU C6yqNFKO8AufggCY8umbFgGPdEM210MNfoPBrbelPS51b4G51hqkbIeu3RoriTi7Vo7cFi+Vz1kiM sALUslzDVkJ8BYhxyw00L8QyXRCi6FWaH8+trtRMfFVDGdrkzWlBKtvffWjYyh4Luo+lOy/OS6qT3 m9QdDZIpGmSwTObLrXRoFA==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (port=3683 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 1o4HP5-0005Wm-09; Thu, 23 Jun 2022 03:37:28 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87pmizrgoi.fsf@localhost> (message from Ihor Radchenko on Thu, 23 Jun 2022 15:18:37 +0800) 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:291527 Archived-At: > From: Ihor Radchenko > Cc: Lynn Winebarger , larsi@gnus.org, > monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, mattiase@acm.org, theophilusx@gmail.com, > rms@gnu.org, acm@muc.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Thu, 23 Jun 2022 15:18:37 +0800 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > >> Not that I don't enjoy trawling through old threads in the emacs-devel archive > >> (searching for mmap led to a thread from the introduction of the portable dumper), > >> but it would be a lot easier if there were design notes somewhere recording > >> the rationale of the decisions reflected in the current code. > > > > We lack someone in the role of the "project historian", who would then > > summarize and publish the design discussions in the form of such > > notes. Volunteers are most welcome. > > What about simply following a convention to link relevant discussion in > the commit message? That convention does exist, and the results of its use are before our eyes ;-). It doesn't help that Git doesn't support retroactive modifications of commit logs, except via cumbersome workarounds that no one seems to like using. And that won't help with past discussions whose commits are in the tree for many years. But yes, using such links is definitely helpful, and I'd encourage people to use that more. (That's one reason why changes should preferably be discussed on the bug tracker: the bug number -- if not forgotten to be mentioned in the log message -- serves as a pointer to the discussions.)