From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Mark H Weaver Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs Lisp's future Date: Tue, 16 Sep 2014 18:58:25 -0400 Message-ID: <87zjdzw4tq.fsf@netris.org> References: <87wq97i78i.fsf@earlgrey.lan> <87sijrv6v9.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1410929829 32044 80.91.229.3 (17 Sep 2014 04:57:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 17 Sep 2014 04:57:09 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: David Kastrup Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Sep 17 06:57:03 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XU7Id-00057U-6I for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 17 Sep 2014 06:57:03 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42054 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XU7Ic-0004cz-Fe for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 17 Sep 2014 00:57:02 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43114) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XU1hx-0007tx-4Z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Sep 2014 18:58:55 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XU1hr-0001FA-8A for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 16 Sep 2014 18:58:49 -0400 Original-Received: from world.peace.net ([96.39.62.75]:46075) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XU1hr-0001E2-2i; Tue, 16 Sep 2014 18:58:43 -0400 Original-Received: from c-24-62-95-23.hsd1.ma.comcast.net ([24.62.95.23] helo=jojen) by world.peace.net with esmtpsa (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.72) (envelope-from ) id 1XU1hb-0007H7-Qr; Tue, 16 Sep 2014 18:58:28 -0400 In-Reply-To: <87sijrv6v9.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> (David Kastrup's message of "Tue, 16 Sep 2014 18:59:38 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 96.39.62.75 X-Mailman-Approved-At: Wed, 17 Sep 2014 00:56:45 -0400 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:174395 Archived-At: David Kastrup writes: > Bug report about basic list functionality not working for lists of more > than 10009 members: > > One of our procedures has a scalability problem. Summarizing this as "basic list functionality not working for lists of more than 10009 members" is a gross misrepresentation. I responded within a day or so, and we had a conversation over the next few days, but quickly ran into the problem that you wanted to change one of our other API procedures in a non-standard way that conflicts with our existing behavior, and you simply wouldn't take "no" for an answer. > The proposed fix is rejected, but no alternative fix is done. I would be glad to fix the problem myself, but I was hoping that you would adapt your patch without changing that other API procedure, so that you would get credit for your work. > is an example > for the inability to compile large expressions on Guile-2.0. The basic > resume for this bug is "large expressions like that will only work with > Guile-2.2+" Is it really a show-stopper that Guile 2.0 has limitations in the sizes of some expression types? Even C has similar limitations, and yet somehow it seems to be successful. Mark