From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Andrea Corallo via "Emacs development discussions." Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: named-let Date: Mon, 11 Jan 2021 22:50:46 +0000 Message-ID: References: <87im86kub6.fsf@logand.com> <86zh1g62zx.fsf@163.com> <875z4385yd.fsf@logand.com> Reply-To: Andrea Corallo Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="36374"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Zhu Zihao , Tomas Hlavaty , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Jan 11 23:51:52 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 1kz62S-0009M5-6e for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 23:51:52 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34880 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kz62R-0007bK-95 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 17:51:51 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:43804) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kz61W-0006sd-5H for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 17:50:54 -0500 Original-Received: from mx.sdf.org ([205.166.94.24]:59044) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kz61T-00039B-Va for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 17:50:53 -0500 Original-Received: from mab (ma.sdf.org [205.166.94.33]) by mx.sdf.org (8.15.2/8.14.5) with ESMTP id 10BMold8017732; Mon, 11 Jan 2021 22:50:47 GMT In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Mon, 11 Jan 2021 17:36:57 -0500") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=205.166.94.24; envelope-from=akrl@sdf.org; helo=mx.sdf.org X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_PASS=-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:262946 Archived-At: Stefan Monnier writes: > With the advent of the native-compiler, "all implementations" is even > harder to reach, since it means, interpreter, byte-code, and native code. Well as I mentioned the native compiler is already capable of that if asked, but in general whichever optimization is done by the byte-compiler is picked by the native compiler cause currently the compilation input is LAP. So I'm not really sure this is adding much complexity from this POV. As a side note I'd be surprised if interpreters in CL implementation are supporting TRE, I guess the interpreter is typically used only for debug or bootstrap therefore should be not very important. Am I wrong? Andrea