From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: constant `e' Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 16:06:57 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87ireah6ia.fsf@wigwam.brockman.se> <854ppu8k1l.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <87y7n6fdod.fsf@wigwam.brockman.se> <87y7n5d9hh.fsf@wigwam.brockman.se> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1171141634 16760 80.91.229.12 (10 Feb 2007 21:07:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 21:07:14 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Daniel Brockman Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Feb 10 22:07:12 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HFzRA-0007hk-MN for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 10 Feb 2007 22:07:12 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HFzRA-0007UG-4k for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 10 Feb 2007 16:07:12 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HFzQz-0007U0-AM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Feb 2007 16:07:01 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HFzQw-0007To-VC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Feb 2007 16:07:00 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HFzQw-0007Tl-OX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Feb 2007 16:06:58 -0500 Original-Received: from tomts36.bellnexxia.net ([209.226.175.93] helo=tomts36-srv.bellnexxia.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1HFzQw-0002q6-9X for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 10 Feb 2007 16:06:58 -0500 Original-Received: from pastel.home ([70.55.81.74]) by tomts36-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.13 201-253-122-130-113-20050324) with ESMTP id <20070210210657.KFMT1862.tomts36-srv.bellnexxia.net@pastel.home> for ; Sat, 10 Feb 2007 16:06:57 -0500 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 2AF267F3F; Sat, 10 Feb 2007 16:06:57 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <87y7n5d9hh.fsf@wigwam.brockman.se> (Daniel Brockman's message of "Sat\, 10 Feb 2007 21\:48\:58 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.93 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: Solaris 8 (1) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:66239 Archived-At: >> Also, the compiler will have to work extra hard to try and figure out >> whether it is safe to optimize it away or not. If it's more work for the >> compiler, it's probably more work for the human reader as well. > I doubt the valitidy of that. The purpose of high-level > languages is to make code easier for humans to read at the > expense of making it harder for computers to execute. > This seems to fundamentally contradict your statement. Being difficult to execute is very different from being difficult to understand. I wrote "more work for the compiler", in a paragraph that talks about optimizing, so I was referring to the effort needed to "understand" rather than "execute" a piece of code. Note that the higher-level languages are always more constraining than lower-level ones (try to write GC in elisp, for example). Those constraints make it easier for people and compilers to understand what the code does, because they can assume they hold without having to check. Stefan