From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs Lisp JIT Compiler Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2018 18:01:43 +0300 Message-ID: <8336vaflig.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87va8ej4o1.fsf@tromey.com> <87mutpiyz6.fsf@tromey.com> <701cd05f423e0c46595a3010f45414d0.squirrel@dancol.org> <520f536b5a603831c9a57a5f6f0978a2.squirrel@dancol.org> <83va8binu8.fsf@gnu.org> <87bma3i26m.fsf@tromey.com> <83in4aigs7.fsf@gnu.org> <86lg94htom.fsf@dod.no> <83in47gbbl.fsf@gnu.org> <876006fzfw.fsf@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1534690825 19636 195.159.176.226 (19 Aug 2018 15:00:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2018 15:00:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Robert Pluim Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Aug 19 17:00:20 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 1frPBk-000510-Mm for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 19 Aug 2018 17:00:20 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:43106 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1frPDr-0005I5-2n for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 19 Aug 2018 11:02:31 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:49087) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1frPDE-0005Hz-Dg for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Aug 2018 11:01:53 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1frPDB-0003U9-9A for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 19 Aug 2018 11:01:52 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:50700) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1frPDB-0003U3-6S; Sun, 19 Aug 2018 11:01:49 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=3839 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1frPDA-0000Qk-Q5; Sun, 19 Aug 2018 11:01:49 -0400 In-reply-to: <876006fzfw.fsf@gmail.com> (message from Robert Pluim on Sun, 19 Aug 2018 12:00:51 +0200) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e 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:228682 Archived-At: > From: Robert Pluim > Cc: Steinar Bang , emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Sun, 19 Aug 2018 12:00:51 +0200 > > Unless Iʼve misunderstood, nothing prevents us from doing both: > pre-compile all the lisp that ships with emacs to C, and also have a > JIT for 'user code'. Personally, a JIT that sometimes gives me a > speed increase with a fallback of 'same speed as before' sounds like a > big win to me. All true and agreed to, but the original issue was whether producing C from Lisp could be a good alternative to implementing JIT, and that is the context in which my response should be read.