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: Suppressing native compilation (short and long term) Date: Sun, 02 Oct 2022 12:53:56 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87bkqxf1ij.fsf@tethera.net> <8335c9dkyf.fsf@gnu.org> <83tu4odez7.fsf@gnu.org> <871qrrpkgx.fsf@trouble.defaultvalue.org> <834jwnbi6c.fsf@gnu.org> <87mtafnun5.fsf@trouble.defaultvalue.org> <83sfk6ahty.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="17834"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Rob Browning , david@tethera.net, emacs-devel@gnu.org, akrl@sdf.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Oct 02 18:54:54 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 1of2Ev-0004To-Lr for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 02 Oct 2022 18:54:54 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54406 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1of2Eu-0003mJ-Om for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 02 Oct 2022 12:54:52 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:56410) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1of2ED-00036L-0n for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 02 Oct 2022 12:54:09 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:50373) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1of2EA-0000MX-D1; Sun, 02 Oct 2022 12:54:07 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 97BEF80723; Sun, 2 Oct 2022 12:54:04 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2EC8980401; Sun, 2 Oct 2022 12:54:03 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1664729643; bh=oV02dbz2D0S1oDDSJzPjQlHg3OXj9GloJp1J44Rq1e4=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=h2DLjnH2z9qf3tMKGpv9mihdfvM4H1de8Qta6xQNicPGxWr+AhXTzRXntNMxS10Y7 pfLnO2ez0MLfSA5qiG3HkDl7MMuYS2a8XQ3k3pouytcL07+rK2JTz+veA6LpNSf8FT K/J9tTcwu0hKRXEUoQsQnlMF4uEaxas+Wo89tEMnBuOXErg8747w9UTPNda4GwsjiT eIew2GXYPWSFBEbyHrctIVJ2xK7NTOiuReCXztJD2/j+wz8uPGquUJnhMW3xEtceAg tqKIRShVVWZ2/LOKobbD5OXh+MAzlbD0w5r4D7uDAWZL227K+JUEGChn4C8R/mEcsu L/9dGHnzdvXaw== Original-Received: from pastel (65-110-220-202.cpe.pppoe.ca [65.110.220.202]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CCF7A12054C; Sun, 2 Oct 2022 12:54:02 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <83sfk6ahty.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sun, 02 Oct 2022 08:57:13 +0300") 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 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:296641 Archived-At: > I don't think you should try to second-guess the user who installs a > package. They could just want to study the sources, for example. I'm quite happy with the use of JIT as the default in Emacs. But I think I agree with Rob that it makes a lot of sense in the context of Debian to eagerly native-compile the packages when they're installed via APT. In APT there's a clearly distinction between installing the package (which requires admin rights and has non-trivial effects on the whole system) and looking at the source code of the package (this distinction is natural in the context of Debian where many/most packages are written in languages like C, but it naturally carries over to ELisp packages). So if user "just want to study the sources" they wouldn't *install* the package at all. > All in all, I think JIT compilation strikes a good balance between > resources and their actual usage. Yes. But the balance is different in different contexts. FWIW, I'm not convinced it's really useful in Debian's `emacs` package to eagerly native compile all the bundled .elc files, but I think it does make a lot of sense for ELisp packages installed separately. In any case, I'd let Debian's maintainers make their own choices for their own specific needs which are slightly different from ours (where our release tarballs and default config are designed in large part for users who'll compile Emacs themselves and who install third party ELisp packages into their $HOME). Stefan