From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: scratch/accurate-warning-pos: Solid progress: the branch now bootstraps. Date: Sat, 01 Dec 2018 15:09:48 +0100 Message-ID: <5C02962C.5040505@gmx.at> References: <23334086-c0a1-7b34-4234-343719618bd1@cs.ucla.edu> <20181128120443.GA4036@ACM> <20181129220552.GI12576@ACM> <9dde4ed7-8401-6022-a668-258d48bb7726@cs.ucla.edu> <20181130185503.GA16256@ACM> <20181130220218.GB16256@ACM> <138d56b7-53df-1ea5-377c-8502245f1b6b@cs.ucla.edu> <5C0239DA.4030907@gmx.at> <20181201124727.GC5102@ACM> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1543673301 30880 195.159.176.226 (1 Dec 2018 14:08:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 1 Dec 2018 14:08:21 +0000 (UTC) Cc: cpitclaudel@gmail.com, Paul Eggert , michael_heerdegen@web.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org, monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA, Eli Zaretskii To: Alan Mackenzie Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Dec 01 15:08:17 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 1gT5wO-0007tu-Ub for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 01 Dec 2018 15:08:17 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:41441 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gT5yV-0000ui-4h for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 01 Dec 2018 09:10:27 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41186) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gT5yK-0000mm-2H for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Dec 2018 09:10:16 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gT5yG-0005IK-42 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 01 Dec 2018 09:10:16 -0500 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.22]:32903) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1gT5yF-0005HZ-RN; Sat, 01 Dec 2018 09:10:12 -0500 Original-Received: from [192.168.1.101] ([46.125.250.126]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx103 [212.227.17.168]) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MFctN-1ghgPy36oP-00EdKr; Sat, 01 Dec 2018 15:09:51 +0100 In-Reply-To: <20181201124727.GC5102@ACM> X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:bGR7UgUyLBki9B6IOLB3JxT5CBbAmUJuYc+RZmtcnvuhR0WodXI J7giNugyUZZ7cadJZNNz2/RZ0lLNf8Lfx/y73QudwCURGtCJfuuiiZZVfCK0WltB3wB28VC tihuOpb7XoFL74+ZoZS8+oZz7QVx4xyrjnZLsheWhV0rcLhAgih9NAxfhHD0oe0O/elKsTc R1Yo41s5W8bM/gcSkpnQA== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1;V03:K0:dBYkH7Oauu8=:Bc7A98ejav6rQOV1D5Sc7L 3DuTkcJmFdtHRcGsxYcMYYCwG1IjhVEeDicC1gpcyUumAo07H11lCSVcu3rTyGNtMQcGB8hMq mA3mV/9gVN4vDBut5GfhKMMC2/a9411/Um1UXVCs/8tNaG7twaVTRHhRjL9avkvp7RrWUMvuw tJjDyJM/NxwfnApAKWJUDR/FqgJOpSDvCusFAe8EslMPJhs3KNCyvfG2dDWjy5YbnY15fOZrj yJpmg6lC7gbQrrFaWY81xAEv6TAG1pUj4H9gyLcRYghbsv7pF8nO5uJ6k2GSdgaEZL0A8QmgW JIbookcEVnQXrUXnz4gHfHnvWdaYVwOuDCMJTTxuJxpUwj4q/zP2mYL8MWqAYiSb4m/m7AVDU vA7XjVmgJ4CnOs1GG7858XTwUbSVoUM3zUN0F2YqNanvxxc7ocD/Wjd9YXSboBJmcUFY9DqRY kOcdvlO17hVYW+fI3pXiTJGL4JYA4DxIggCsGc5BUKjiExNImh+7KgWEIZQsFmj8wOYZo3RDn al/TkJZD7cjavP7sgz3X0+/rWmvlWWuZDWm+Tll7d202vAcACl8nBS8V9Op/c9XJVl/7L0kuk Ecgn8EvcRDcwKhzRk3eu1UalkKrafMEOscvCTwp5UUd9GkhxZqkEooW+M+2M1hZPJiPNb5Zqy dGYtjBC25oLvon+mB35WtMOQ12c0CQn+ky1iPIf7N6qIwV+Ak4hxyf8SKkzAb9Zjk91SAs76z vvXovNKiAWlBeXLYn8w689ONtL9oFefiRgeZ8n39z7mDHv+c4MUWO9b78xJx00GgMzcsXds2 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 212.227.17.22 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:231555 Archived-At: Hello, Alan >> There are around 50 issues in current Emacs that annoy me at least as >> much as wrong positions reported by the byte compiler. > > Likely, none of them are as difficult to address as the byte compiler > bug. Running an incremental copying collector in a separate thread is, for example. > But who's going to address them, if they can expect the reaction > I'm getting at the moment? I've been following this thread since its beginning and I've not seen an unjustified reaction so far, including mine. I've kept quiet when the 'open-paren-in-column-0-is-defun-start' convention was abolished recently. And I would have kept quiet in the case at hand as well. But Eli once said that people should complain _before_ a change is made and so I did. >> If, on the average, solving any such issue took away just 2% of the >> performance of my Emacs, I'd experience an overall slowdown of 100% >> when solving all of them. So please note that Paul is not alone with >> his concerns. > > On average, solving these other bugs will cost 0% in performance. > You're positing a completely unrealistic scenario. Right. But mainly so because many of these 50 problems should have a solution in the opposite direction. They aim at improving performance rather than degrading it. For example, I spent quite some time on reducing the overhead associated with creating Emacs tooltip frames - largely unnoticed, but it saves me an entire GC cycle for every tooltip displayed here. Why should I spend my time on such things if any gains are annihilated by solutions like yours. > Have you even tried scratch/accurate-warning-pos? You've said in the > past that you have a slow machine, so if that's still true, you would > probably be the person to notice perceptible slowdown, should there be > any. Do you notice any slowdown with it? I haven't tried it. As a rule, I bootstrap each of my Emacs instances once a year, after Glenn changed the file headers. Here a bootstrap means that I can't use my machine for more than an hour. And that I have to either make a separate copy of my Emacs tree or do another bootstrap to return to the previous version. This year I already made one extra bootstrap for the portable dumper and that consumed enough of my remaining energy for such endeavours. You have to live with the fact that people like me live in a different world. > The byte compiler bug is extremely unusual, possibly unique, in its > resistance to being resolved. Just about every possible approach has > been tried (along with several which are not possible), and only one > approach, the one in scratch/accurate-warning-pos, has got anywhere at > all. > > If you still object to this fix, even after trying it, what you are > saying is that you prefer fast buggy software over slightly slower > functional software. I don't say that. IMO the "byte compiler bug" has a simple fix which, however, nobody but me would accept: When there is the slightest doubt do not print position indications. Also I don't understand why it should be the byte compiler's task to check the syntax of expressions for correctness. If the byte compiler raises an error or new Lisp code should be compiled, run a separate syntax checker that gets as close as possible to the source of any error in the code. And it can spend as much time on that as it needs. But enough heresy here. martin