From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Using the correct terms LAP vs ELisp Bytecode or something else Date: Wed, 20 Dec 2017 20:50:28 -0500 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1513821043 10517 195.159.176.226 (21 Dec 2017 01:50:43 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 21 Dec 2017 01:50:43 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Dec 21 02:50:39 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eRq0M-0002SX-Ut for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 21 Dec 2017 02:50:39 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:52561 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eRq2L-0006LF-AD for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 20 Dec 2017 20:52:41 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49504) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eRq0v-0005rw-2v for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Dec 2017 20:51:13 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eRq0r-0000ky-Ob for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Dec 2017 20:51:13 -0500 Original-Received: from [195.159.176.226] (port=33489 helo=blaine.gmane.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eRq0r-0000jD-H7 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 20 Dec 2017 20:51:09 -0500 Original-Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1eRpyl-0004GG-Ez for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 21 Dec 2017 02:48:59 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 39 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:TDGEpwHXNvw/3XbbxvVIAtTl8vY= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 195.159.176.226 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:221292 Archived-At: > What's the difference between LAP and Elisp Bytecode (if that is the right > term)? > LAP stands for Lisp Assembly Program, so I imagine that refers to the text > representation. IIRC, LAP code is represented as a list (or is it a vector?) where each instruction is represented by a symbol with some arguments. So it's not a textual representation, but it's a "symbolic" representation that's fairly easy to manipulate and with many similarities to traditional assembly: use of labels instead of actual addresses, use of pseudo-instructions (e.g. labels), and things like that. > Bytecode however generally refers to a more binary > representation, but I guess often it includes the mnemonics for the code. Elisp bytecode is represented as a unibyte string (i.e. an array of bytes), so yes, it's a lot more binary. It's the "garbage" that used to show up in backtraces. > If I want to describe the the assembly instructions, should I refer to it > as LAP instructions or Elisp bytecode instructions or Emacs Lisp bytecode > instructions? I think you can talk about the "bytecode instruction" and have that include both the LAP representation of that instruction and its actual bytecode representation: either the difference doesn't matter, or the context should make it clear which is meant. > And is it "bytecode' or "byte code"? No opinion on that. > Or maybe there aren't any conventions and none of this matters so I can > just use whatever I feel like. Pretty much, yes. Stefan