From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Antipov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [Emacs-diffs] trunk r117941: Default to stack objects on non-GNU/Linux, non-DOS_NT platforms. Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 13:51:44 +0400 Message-ID: <5423E5B0.4070002@yandex.ru> References: <837g0sw1yx.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1411638755 11072 80.91.229.3 (25 Sep 2014 09:52:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 09:52:35 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Sep 25 11:52:27 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1XX5is-0005Uu-Rj for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 25 Sep 2014 11:52:26 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39239 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XX5is-0003CF-G1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 25 Sep 2014 05:52:26 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54568) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XX5iY-0003C6-J0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 25 Sep 2014 05:52:13 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XX5iR-0005dh-Bi for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 25 Sep 2014 05:52:06 -0400 Original-Received: from forward8l.mail.yandex.net ([84.201.143.141]:38672) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XX5iJ-0005Vo-N7; Thu, 25 Sep 2014 05:51:51 -0400 Original-Received: from smtp11.mail.yandex.net (smtp11.mail.yandex.net [95.108.130.67]) by forward8l.mail.yandex.net (Yandex) with ESMTP id 599511A41185; Thu, 25 Sep 2014 13:51:45 +0400 (MSK) Original-Received: from smtp11.mail.yandex.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by smtp11.mail.yandex.net (Yandex) with ESMTP id E2FAB7E05FC; Thu, 25 Sep 2014 13:51:44 +0400 (MSK) Original-Received: from unknown (unknown [37.139.80.10]) by smtp11.mail.yandex.net (nwsmtp/Yandex) with ESMTPSA id KAIPrwx8OF-piHmDjAW; Thu, 25 Sep 2014 13:51:44 +0400 (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (Client certificate not present) X-Yandex-Uniq: cdb16a9f-353d-4fd1-8d32-576f4d19bc92 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yandex.ru; s=mail; t=1411638704; bh=aglu+GRh5Uoy85ijG4i34I79VAwzC/gVHQ/eFMXmxwY=; h=Message-ID:Date:From:User-Agent:MIME-Version:To:CC:Subject: References:In-Reply-To:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=muelp2OMmxpYQvSf5xY5qkW1oKw7mRRe9JMibzkEU2S6dgmez98oYO/VOEqwzke/Y 4Y4sglZHmDMam7B1vkQML9DZiKaZSvwg/8GvTcFFjloTQQSOlKjvcpcZ9EJGMNrSVu 8seltFlDAv949n7WBbS36cabMJYgF4Lc64BHXUIM= Authentication-Results: smtp11.mail.yandex.net; dkim=pass header.i=@yandex.ru User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.1.1 In-Reply-To: <837g0sw1yx.fsf@gnu.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 84.201.143.141 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:174702 Archived-At: On 09/25/2014 12:15 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > It was done in complete silence, without prior discussions wrt > whether to make this the default. (Yes, I suggested that, but no > one replied, and we never discussed it.) IMO 1) any discussions whether to make USE_STACK_LISP_OBJECTS the default makes no sense until we know whether it's worth the complexities at all. For the latter, we need a lot of feedback from users, preferably with the very different usage patterns and workloads. The simplest (and the only reliable) method is to enable it by default and see what happens. OTOH I'm not against making it opt-out, as you suggested. > It arbitrarily excludes the native MS-Windows builds from this > feature, for no good reasons: the 64-bit Windows build has no > problems with it IMO 2) responsible developer should not enable any code she/he can't test. If you are rather sure that it should work on 64-bit MS-Windows, feel free to add this class of systems to an appropriate #ifdef (to be honest, this is simpler and friendlier than writing such an indignant e-mails). > In general, every feature that exists only on some platforms is a > Bad Thing, as it introduces maintenance problems and in particular > makes people who work on different platforms unable to usefully > compare what they see and solve problems reported by others. USE_STACK_LISP_OBJECT is not such a feature. It's rather under construction and not yet populated to all (most?) platforms we aim to support. If you want to help with that, you're always welcome. > In sum, I don't understand these sneaky practices, and I wish they'd > stopped. Sneaky? I would call it too brave. Dmitry