From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Inlining policy Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2020 14:15:38 -0400 Message-ID: References: <86tv2h2vww.fsf@gmail.com> <20200326193128.GC14092@ACM> <86d08y4zsx.fsf@gmail.com> <83sghs7qdz.fsf@gnu.org> <83h7y63sjj.fsf@gnu.org> <834ku43c61.fsf@gnu.org> <83k12zz6ds.fsf@gnu.org> <054393f3-3873-ab6e-b325-0eca354d8838@gmx.at> <29a6c120-f260-0ea3-f5e0-1d3dd6323d09@gmx.at> <5752c978-3a13-4e09-18b3-14201eaf1083@gmx.at> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="65245"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: martin rudalics , Paul Eggert , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Andrea Corallo Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Apr 06 20:30:24 2020 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 1jLWVr-000GtE-JP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 06 Apr 2020 20:30:23 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36770 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jLWVq-00062c-Dt for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 06 Apr 2020 14:30:22 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42845) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jLWHf-0002Ox-EJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Apr 2020 14:15:44 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jLWHe-0005Fi-HP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Apr 2020 14:15:43 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:55441) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jLWHe-0005FE-DQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Apr 2020 14:15:42 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C7B0110050E; Mon, 6 Apr 2020 14:15:41 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 09D781004AF; Mon, 6 Apr 2020 14:15:40 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1586196940; bh=hcPF4FkD3TboDk7YsSE6CkTTyp5ZGAeVqsD7s5qmj84=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=C+iSTBMdm1L47kylsGWYbgVhlsVyuj/BwZWs+wDJPeS1dkSVG2+ZUMf9phdOkskyJ GpqEfmLbMgnok6zUuRIIo+eRz7/O8a91tlZotk4LwMAhp7XO2lfKOqipX3cYOjhRqz 1bx3dH9aRB/LViywoWw9mDMLalM46sUJSk5a7S2FbURz4L70N6emIG7wD1BqlFgPA+ poyt2x74kp/6IFFgT8+DIsYnw/lNXnjbpWT7A2Alu/jakwGaBq9jtuIsPw4K8N1mFF yx4SnCK1+fcgBMWpp3gQC75f+tTZjzllrVQ92DTNI+ujVlgDz9BICy/8dk5309lv6K Y3oftfYGflQqQ== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [104.247.241.114]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9CBCE120778; Mon, 6 Apr 2020 14:15:39 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Andrea Corallo's message of "Sun, 05 Apr 2020 10:23:38 +0000") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 132.204.25.50 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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:246547 Archived-At: > what about having a new macro to control the key operations we want to > always have inlined at -O0 and -Og instead of falling back into defining > these as macros? > > Something like the attached patch. That sounds even better than what we have now since it removed the need for the duplicate definition (once as macro and once as function). I haven't checked whether it has the same performance impact, and neither do I know how it compares w.r.t. "portability/reliability", but judging just from the patch, I really like it. Paul? Stefan