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: Emacs is not reproducible Date: Mon, 17 May 2021 12:40:39 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87lf8dcrcd.fsf@disroot.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="14322"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Bone Baboon Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon May 17 19:11:12 2021 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 1liglr-0003VW-Ox for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 17 May 2021 19:11:11 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45916 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1liglq-0007UC-RR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 17 May 2021 13:11:10 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:37460) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ligIZ-0002Nc-3Q for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 17 May 2021 12:40:56 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:45056) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ligIO-0001eB-6o for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 17 May 2021 12:40:52 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id A551D8089C; Mon, 17 May 2021 12:40:42 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 340378065C; Mon, 17 May 2021 12:40:41 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1621269641; bh=KpGFV5pCQeD9WvBoHzht3fGPB5ropMhYFVxAhEyvcYQ=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=RrqIf3xYL/IziK+4HOzYJWh/V9iLAuPzIS8uLI5OGGtk9D3FeNcooXYWBHSEjyCfK t7h1scrLyERSGfN0AFe3SrycoU31H/RkLUxh82AX38Hs0GUf3OloWPd4oIdth3FnhJ 0AHNhy4wkME7I5wnO/TYybujFq4lMmXwwvc6N8EKxBauksLTp9fjvuvA7MNjRnhT1F QI/yViKaoiqsixWrrZK3EuGZqyJGKcxM0ja+R5an6iOOOHijKLK0blug1fpTQKP10d pNezHERroHhcjcFD85cXQzjkCtfwnyhZXP0CnVJpf9ZK1m7dVP923kEwrnzJanEz2x ezrtjXMSgsjHw== Original-Received: from alfajor (76-10-140-76.dsl.teksavvy.com [76.10.140.76]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id F255112001E; Mon, 17 May 2021 12:40:40 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <87lf8dcrcd.fsf@disroot.org> (Bone Baboon's message of "Mon, 17 May 2021 11:28:18 -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 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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:269416 Archived-At: > Is there currently any work underway to make Emacs reproducible? There has been changes made in the past to fix some problems. I have a pending patch in bug#46502 (see below) which aims to fix some more of those problems, but still haven't heard confirmation that it helps. Stefan diff --git a/lisp/emacs-lisp/byte-opt.el b/lisp/emacs-lisp/byte-opt.el index e0feb95a46..06c925b7bf 100644 --- a/lisp/emacs-lisp/byte-opt.el +++ b/lisp/emacs-lisp/byte-opt.el @@ -268,32 +269,16 @@ byte-compile-inline-expand ;; The byte-code will be really inlined in byte-compile-unfold-bcf. `(,fn ,@(cdr form))) ((or `(lambda . ,_) `(closure . ,_)) - (if (not (or (eq fn localfn) ;From the same file => same mode. - (eq (car fn) ;Same mode. - (if lexical-binding 'closure 'lambda)))) - ;; While byte-compile-unfold-bcf can inline dynbind byte-code into - ;; letbind byte-code (or any other combination for that matter), we - ;; can only inline dynbind source into dynbind source or letbind - ;; source into letbind source. - (progn - ;; We can of course byte-compile the inlined function - ;; first, and then inline its byte-code. - (byte-compile name) - `(,(symbol-function name) ,@(cdr form))) - (let ((newfn (if (eq fn localfn) - ;; If `fn' is from the same file, it has already - ;; been preprocessed! - `(function ,fn) - ;; Try and process it "in its original environment". - (let ((byte-compile-bound-variables nil)) - (byte-compile-preprocess - (byte-compile--reify-function fn)))))) - (if (eq (car-safe newfn) 'function) - (macroexp--unfold-lambda `(,(cadr newfn) ,@(cdr form))) - ;; This can happen because of macroexp-warn-and-return &co. - (byte-compile-warn - "Inlining closure %S failed" name) - form)))) + (if (eq fn localfn) ;From the same file => same mode. + (macroexp--unfold-lambda `(,fn ,@(cdr form))) + ;; While byte-compile-unfold-bcf can inline dynbind byte-code into + ;; letbind byte-code (or any other combination for that matter), we + ;; can only inline dynbind source into dynbind source or letbind + ;; source into letbind source. + ;; We can of course byte-compile the inlined function + ;; first, and then inline its byte-code. + (byte-compile name) + `(,(symbol-function name) ,@(cdr form)))) (_ ;; Give up on inlining. form))))