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: Revisit patch for Bug#11935? Date: Mon, 05 Dec 2016 17:47:19 +0200 Message-ID: <8337i2l6ns.fsf@gnu.org> References: <661e36f7-2a24-d7f3-f7d2-f1ef98216f5b@cs.ucla.edu> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1480952868 7560 195.159.176.226 (5 Dec 2016 15:47:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 5 Dec 2016 15:47:48 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ravi@ravidesai.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Paul Eggert Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Dec 05 16:47:43 2016 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 1cDvUT-00016H-6E for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 05 Dec 2016 16:47:41 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42726 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cDvUX-0005eR-53 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 05 Dec 2016 10:47:45 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:48948) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cDvTv-0005Lk-Jn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Dec 2016 10:47:13 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cDvTq-00064x-Ir for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 05 Dec 2016 10:47:06 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:46404) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cDvTq-00064a-Ac; Mon, 05 Dec 2016 10:47:02 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:3217 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1cDvTp-0002g6-L2; Mon, 05 Dec 2016 10:47:01 -0500 In-reply-to: <661e36f7-2a24-d7f3-f7d2-f1ef98216f5b@cs.ucla.edu> (message from Paul Eggert on Sun, 4 Dec 2016 18:21:31 -0800) 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:210062 Archived-At: > From: Paul Eggert > Date: Sun, 4 Dec 2016 18:21:31 -0800 > > On 12/04/2016 04:07 PM, Ravi Desai wrote: > > Is this now a good time to revisit the original patch submitted for > > https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=11935 ? > > I would guess not. As I recall, Eli is still using GCC 3 No, those days are long gone. 5.3.0 is what I have here now. > and I suspect some other developers are still using pre-4.8 > GCC. Let's kick this can down the road a while more. I installed the > attached. Thanks. I think this is related not only to the GCC version, but also to whether developers use -Og when building development versions of Emacs. I'm still using -O0, and only switch to -Og when I build pretests (and switch to -O2 when building the released tarballs). That's because I've found that -Og still makes debugging more difficult compared to -O0. For example, many values appear as "optimized out" in the backtraces, which sometimes requires me to go up the stack very far to find the value. (-Og is actually -O1 with a couple of more aggressive optimizations disabled, so what I see is not surprising.) So the question is how many people who customary debug on the C level build with -O0, regardless of their compiler version. Could people who read this please tell what they use?