From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Unboxed package manager Date: Wed, 22 Mar 2023 08:29:43 +0100 Message-ID: References: <08b5f766ddd9da754a86@heytings.org> <08b5f766ddf4b33993cd@heytings.org> <08b5f766dd896dfbed4c@heytings.org> <83jzza6xwk.fsf@gnu.org> <08b5f766dd0f765bb1a9@heytings.org> <83edpi6vl4.fsf@gnu.org> <08b5f766dd05e9469540@heytings.org> <838rfq6mi8.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="ih5tJF8nlVnJiCjZ" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="35008"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 22 08:30:38 2023 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 1pesvd-0008vq-Rc for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 22 Mar 2023 08:30:37 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pesuu-0001dE-BB; Wed, 22 Mar 2023 03:29:52 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pesus-0001cO-Ky for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Mar 2023 03:29:50 -0400 Original-Received: from mail.tuxteam.de ([5.199.139.25]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1pesuq-0001Hn-HX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Mar 2023 03:29:50 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=tuxteam.de; s=mail; h=From:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:MIME-Version:References:Message-ID: Subject:To:Date:Sender:Reply-To:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe:List-Subscribe: List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=NBdXZaRveaAcvEwRSW2mdRB6kSjCi1PU6mCEjPaFtWw=; b=dKeCFRsGyiWOwUG5r2pWR4UV+t RQCWTfTzPu/ynLXRiyMtwqpwlNn2XkROmkCwOzEtHpaBG1mbi8B67Hi3LdKM0Y2SE1XOzTw8WgB6i 7blXXbuKfEChzXLfo2ta0qRmtSaYQnyMmFUqmiQCD06cz7GXRGmS1kHSKPtbOO+0vdQM68W4J4QgN a/l5ym/57izjftOifnhFMW791Jixuf2MbM7SFRbEeKEO5KVvc+OoJ1eYum1enj8gduMAUFUctX8rB tC1YnwQzosb3rrkFqr5aJ9FrjuRiWYD8aN8D78cEQjocIjsoDV/1Co7ve3in5w6m/o/tf4vnHvn+S uJ4IKxbg==; Original-Received: from tomas by mail.tuxteam.de with local (Exim 4.94.2) (envelope-from ) id 1pesul-0000AX-Gw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 22 Mar 2023 08:29:43 +0100 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <838rfq6mi8.fsf@gnu.org> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=5.199.139.25; envelope-from=tomas@tuxteam.de; helo=mail.tuxteam.de X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:304692 Archived-At: --ih5tJF8nlVnJiCjZ Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Tue, Mar 21, 2023 at 07:29:51PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Date: Tue, 21 Mar 2023 14:20:41 +0000 > > From: Gregory Heytings > > cc: owinebar@gmail.com, casouri@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org > >=20 > > >> I'm not surprised, but I wonder whether it's possible to do better. > > > > > > Yes: load each package with an explicit absolute file name, without= =20 > > > relying on load-path search. > > > > >=20 > > Of course =F0=9F=98=89 But by "doing better" I meant "to improve the w= ay Emacs uses=20 > > load-path in such cases". >=20 > Why try to solve a problem if it can be avoided altogether? >=20 > > Likely with some kind of cache. >=20 > A cache will not necessarily help, and you will pay the price of > searching it at least once. It should be clear that enlarging the > length of load-path is not scalable, unless we make it a hash-table of > sorts. And I'm not sure we want this kind of complexity for such a > hilariously marginal use case. I agree 100%. A cache is not free (performance wise, but also, more importantly bug wise). You'd make the overwhelming majority of users pay that price for a corner case which, again, in its vast majority would translate to "well, don't do that, then". This might change if our landscape changed radically, but: are we there yet? Cheers --=20 t --ih5tJF8nlVnJiCjZ Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iF0EABECAB0WIQRp53liolZD6iXhAoIFyCz1etHaRgUCZBquYQAKCRAFyCz1etHa Rle8AJ4ngw6egobIRck0j+vKLZ1AMFwxDgCeM3/dQIYFm0raNlNgXpaPW95Kgf8= =BlQ0 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --ih5tJF8nlVnJiCjZ--