From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Daniel Colascione" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: CHECK_STRUCTS/dmpstruct.h mechanism is broken. Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2019 12:02:35 -0700 Message-ID: <87ebcd1529e31ae7aecfcf8c073d848a.squirrel@dancol.org> References: <20190228202146.GC4686@ACM> <20190228205955.GD4686@ACM> <20190410162203.GA4009@ACM> <9809d5ce-c1c4-48e9-6dac-489431b34067@cs.ucla.edu> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="212555"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.23 [SVN] Cc: Alan Mackenzie , Daniel Colascione , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Paul Eggert" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 10 21:03:21 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 (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hEIVF-000tCt-3P for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 21:03:21 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36522 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hEIVE-00077u-2m for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 15:03:20 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:49262) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hEIUY-00077n-79 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 15:02:39 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hEIUX-0000tw-8v for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 15:02:38 -0400 Original-Received: from dancol.org ([2600:3c01::f03c:91ff:fedf:adf3]:37842) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hEIUW-0000rE-Vl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 15:02:37 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=dancol.org; s=x; h=Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-Type:MIME-Version:Cc:To:From:Subject:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Message-ID; bh=4xuXOJGdDqlJk/2QHsHPqoI6NPodYJcNp9a5TZglyGo=; b=Mca+L/9vv6fRiEs7d72ou7IwwH0p3UKIudP2H464Zo+h0kK1RRYM/ruXEVCkoETNqiqvsRT9EZ78GCdDqUT5O5W/dIX0HLpcFuBGBlr2RYqgyWvSChXoLIdvEnJY5dTZ2l1APD9EJgxTDs+QAlLDaf2s1AC89l0s6LXFrJPTJwHeLGU7mZEckXxorj7B5s1nwLZua21DPsf6GLcHp7t3+ibpd9bESgyIl1Y5zD/k4rENPVxYSOqw1n67xMbiysZaBYWidhVUvCrFffBQS+z30dCpgTljpo6CnwhDksfHchljh3pqKPCLrvmF08m55Fsk93X32ppVEqT+04CX4J2bsg==; Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=dancol.org) by dancol.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hEIUV-0005tn-DG; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 12:02:35 -0700 Original-Received: from 127.0.0.1 (SquirrelMail authenticated user dancol) by dancol.org with HTTP; Wed, 10 Apr 2019 12:02:35 -0700 In-Reply-To: <9809d5ce-c1c4-48e9-6dac-489431b34067@cs.ucla.edu> X-Priority: 3 (Normal) Importance: Normal X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 2600:3c01::f03c:91ff:fedf:adf3 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:235243 Archived-At: > On 4/10/19 11:47 AM, Daniel Colascione wrote: >> Without CHECK_STRUCTS, we *will* break dumped >> Emacs in some subtle way sooner or later. > > We're gonna break dumped Emacs in subtle ways no matter what. After all, > pdumper.c was broken in subtle ways when it was first introduced, > despite CHECK_STRUCTS. That's just life, and it's not the issue here. > The issue is whether the benefits of the CHECK_STRUCTS mechanism is > worth the hassle. In my experience it's definitely not worth it. > > The more gingerbread we put into the Emacs build procedure, the more > it's off-putting to other potential developers (and the more work it is > for us). We already have too much build overhead (starting with > Autoconf! I hate Autoconf! It should go away!) and we should not neglect > its costs when looking at the benefits of a new hassle we add to the > build procedure. So far the benefits of CHECK_STRUCT have been zero in > the master, and the costs have been slowdown and significant annoyance > to the developer who's made the most changes to this part of the code. CHECK_STRUCTS was very useful when pdumper was out of tree and I had to rebase it regularly. You can disable the thing locally for iterative development.