From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Tom Tromey Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Patch for fields of `struct buffer' Date: Mon, 31 Jan 2011 19:42:12 -0700 Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1296528157 28263 80.91.229.12 (1 Feb 2011 02:42:37 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 1 Feb 2011 02:42:37 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 01 03:42:33 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Pk6CO-0007bo-OS for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 01 Feb 2011 03:42:33 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36279 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Pk6CE-000197-P0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 31 Jan 2011 21:42:22 -0500 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=44386 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Pk6CA-000192-3X for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 31 Jan 2011 21:42:19 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Pk6C9-00089R-01 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 31 Jan 2011 21:42:17 -0500 Original-Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:19164) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Pk6C7-00088u-Ai; Mon, 31 Jan 2011 21:42:15 -0500 Original-Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12]) by mx1.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p112gEZw030227 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 31 Jan 2011 21:42:14 -0500 Original-Received: from ns3.rdu.redhat.com (ns3.rdu.redhat.com [10.11.255.199]) by int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p112gEfN031454; Mon, 31 Jan 2011 21:42:14 -0500 Original-Received: from opsy.redhat.com (ovpn01.gateway.prod.ext.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.9.1]) by ns3.rdu.redhat.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p112gD41032310; Mon, 31 Jan 2011 21:42:13 -0500 Original-Received: by opsy.redhat.com (Postfix, from userid 500) id 072683782E1; Mon, 31 Jan 2011 19:42:12 -0700 (MST) X-Attribution: Tom In-Reply-To: (Tom Tromey's message of "Mon, 31 Jan 2011 12:57:52 -0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.2 (gnu/linux) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.67 on 10.5.11.12 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 209.132.183.28 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:135373 Archived-At: RMS> That is more limited than I thought it was. If it is needed for RMS> non-preemptive thread switching, the benefit would justify the cost, RMS> but I think it isn't needed for that. If this is would only be needed RMS> for preemptive thread switching, I think the loss of clarity and RMS> naturalness of the code is enough reason not to do it. Tom> Ok. I will stop work on this patch, then. I am not sure if I am Tom> interested in working on threads done the other way, I will have to Tom> think about it. Tom> You might want to consider backing out my earlier patch. It won't be Tom> needed either. Someone gently pointed out off-list that I am perhaps being too hasty in abandoning this approach so soon. To be honest, I don't really understand how Emacs development works -- it seems to be an anarchic free-for-all, but I have trouble accepting that this could possibly be the case. Anyway, the patch is as complete as I can make it. It is no trouble to regenerate it; I have done many updates and recreations in the past few weeks. All that remains is a "go" or "no-go" from the powers that be. Tom