From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: VIRT_ADDR_VARIES Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 18:43:06 +0200 Message-ID: <83d3d0gc85.fsf@gnu.org> References: <4EB73983.1060000@cs.ucla.edu> <4EB86864.5080709@cs.ucla.edu> <4EB96841.7020701@cs.ucla.edu> <4EB99C7D.8000407@cs.ucla.edu> <4EBABBF5.5030602@cs.ucla.edu> <4EBB8882.6080504@cs.ucla.edu> <4EBBFBF7.2030107@cs.ucla.edu> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1320943524 10246 80.91.229.12 (10 Nov 2011 16:45:24 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 16:45:24 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Paul Eggert Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Nov 10 17:45:20 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ROXkd-0001zc-7h for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 10 Nov 2011 17:45:19 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55229 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ROXkc-000687-B6 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 10 Nov 2011 11:45:18 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:50339) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ROXkX-00067f-Ea for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Nov 2011 11:45:17 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ROXkR-0002Lo-3J for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Nov 2011 11:45:13 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout23.012.net.il ([80.179.55.175]:42886) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ROXkQ-0002KS-PW for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Nov 2011 11:45:07 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout23.012.net.il by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LUG00000EGUQH00@a-mtaout23.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Nov 2011 18:45:05 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.228.182.120]) by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LUG000OPEJ3PS10@a-mtaout23.012.net.il>; Thu, 10 Nov 2011 18:45:05 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <4EBBFBF7.2030107@cs.ucla.edu> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 80.179.55.175 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:145972 Archived-At: > Date: Thu, 10 Nov 2011 08:29:43 -0800 > From: Paul Eggert > CC: emacs-devel@gnu.org > > On 11/10/11 03:06, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > It could be that a test against my_edata was just a means, > > but we should be sure it was > > Yes, I'm sure it was a means. But why would someone do such a thing? why not test against the start and end of pure[], like the code conditioned on VIRT_ADDR_VARIES does? Was all that just to keep pure[] private and not expose it as an external symbol? Or was there some other reason?