From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: master c7d2a0d: * lisp/emacs-lisp/benchmark.el (benchmark-run): Allow variable. Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 16:06:15 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20180327010741.32424.61536@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> <20180327010741.DB51620512@vcs0.savannah.gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1522181104 15971 195.159.176.226 (27 Mar 2018 20:05:04 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 27 Mar 2018 20:05:04 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 27 22:05:00 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1f0uq4-00042x-7z for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 22:05:00 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:35882 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f0us7-000223-LI for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 16:07:07 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47843) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f0urV-00021t-9E for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 16:06:30 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f0urR-0002OX-BU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 16:06:29 -0400 Original-Received: from [195.159.176.226] (port=57140 helo=blaine.gmane.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f0urR-0002OH-4e for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 16:06:25 -0400 Original-Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1f0upI-0003Fk-Nr for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Mar 2018 22:04:12 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 30 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:8zxUDgYFl4uMJSyqEW8KyxSEri8= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 195.159.176.226 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:224106 Archived-At: >> What's the intended meaning of this nil? > I assume nil means 1. Doesn't seem particularly sensible, but there you go. Until now it didn't: it was taken as an instruction to execute, i.e. (benchmark-run nil (setq m (1+ 0))) is treated as (benchmark-run 1 (progn nil (setq m (1+ 0)))) rather than (benchmark-run 1 (setq m (1+ 0))) It just happens to do the same. The same holds for (benchmark-run (+ 3 4) (setq m (1+ 0))) which behaves like (benchmark-run 1 (+ 3 4) (setq m (1+ 0))) > Whatever happens, benchmark-run and benchmark-run-compiled should be > consistent. Oh, right, I did miss this one, thanks, Stefan