From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: native compilation units Date: Sat, 11 Jun 2022 16:34:23 -0400 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="9570"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Andrea Corallo , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Lynn Winebarger Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 11 22:35:18 2022 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 1o07pE-0002De-4g for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 11 Jun 2022 22:35:16 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55134 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o07pC-0000mT-OG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 11 Jun 2022 16:35:14 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:37130) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o07oU-0008Vn-OI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Jun 2022 16:34:30 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:16103) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1o07oR-0000nj-UR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 11 Jun 2022 16:34:29 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 89E744408A2; Sat, 11 Jun 2022 16:34:26 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 5253A44123C; Sat, 11 Jun 2022 16:34:25 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1654979665; bh=QhMwU3e1Ktk5afNQl11vXbtNXkcwwjVmpCLKFa1wYXc=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=n022MEpRRh92F4JgeeOyWi0Skh54AEWACK5nYxUyd+rl8a2ic7sv0rX3SxNWU9Zgv zoGeVcVILW67aWE2aKN3MOa+AUToIvNLIMngVs+7adTUgD6a/1SPlJoPzRJSuBhBfh uRDJyvha9+Rp5VemZIis4xtZ/vZyHv4Nq2K6BpTVgCHd99Rp4SGR1Wgyn656FZb7jw ak7BVUqAATVZTfwLeiAsKghXrcF1R/G7pmWzZC9ea/NuDwZdgt1u2LKx+wxI3quKsN U/EjODv/hIbPUScMZK8bCQaWRwIIbISyqAnIL8jAviPItRuFtyQ9yqhWv0zjjE9chY DHP+UX4T/4mPw== Original-Received: from pastel (unknown [45.72.221.51]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 2178F120173; Sat, 11 Jun 2022 16:34:25 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Lynn Winebarger's message of "Sat, 11 Jun 2022 13:49:13 -0400") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:291046 Archived-At: >> In which sense would it be different from: >> >> (cl-flet >> ... >> (defun ...) >> (defun ...) >> ...) >> >> > Good point - it's my scheme background confusing me. I was thinking defun > would operate with similar scoping rules as defvar and establish a local > binding, where fset (like setq) would not create any new bindings. I was not talking about performance but about semantics (under the assumption that if the semantics is the same then it should be possible to get the same performance somehow). > (1) I don't know how much performance difference (if any) there is between > (fsetq exported-fxn #'internal-implementation) > and > (defun exported-fxn (x y ...) (internal-implementation x y ...)) If you don't want the indirection, then use `defalias` (which is like `fset` but registers the action as one that *defines* the function, for the purpose of `C-h f` and the likes, and they also have slightly different semantics w.r.t advice). > (2) I'm also thinking of more aggressively forcing const-ness at run-time > with something like: > (eval-when-compile > (cl-flet ((internal-implemenation (x y ...) body ...)) > (fset exported-fxn #'internal-implementation))) > (fset exported-fxn (eval-when-compile #'exported-fxn)) > > If that makes sense, is there a way to do the same thing with defun? I don't know what the above code snippet is intended to show/do, sorry :-( Stefan