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: bignum branch Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 20:53:01 +0300 Message-ID: <83fu0h7nr6.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87o9fbbw1t.fsf@tromey.com> <86in5jdj49.fsf@gmail.com> <83wotxaiwi.fsf@gnu.org> <86k1pxmvmx.fsf@gmail.com> <83efg4a6ie.fsf@gnu.org> <41221ccf-0c1a-c7e6-2204-e3f9056f7eb5@cs.ucla.edu> <838t6c9wx5.fsf@gnu.org> <53ba128d-7888-e15a-c4a2-1d7a65f51345@cs.ucla.edu> <83wotu7fcj.fsf@gnu.org> <83k1pt7q1e.fsf@gnu.org> <83h8kx7oeu.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1531849859 30886 195.159.176.226 (17 Jul 2018 17:50:59 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 17:50:59 +0000 (UTC) Cc: andrewjmoreton@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Paul Eggert Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jul 17 19:50:54 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 1ffU7i-0007wt-LR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 19:50:54 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:60725 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ffU9p-0004L7-GR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 13:53:05 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42588) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ffU9g-0004Kz-7S for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 13:52:57 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ffU9b-0007bN-Hn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 13:52:56 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:42857) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ffU9b-0007b9-DC; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 13:52:51 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=1583 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1ffU9a-0002Jb-Ru; Tue, 17 Jul 2018 13:52:51 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Paul Eggert on Tue, 17 Jul 2018 10:41:43 -0700) 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:227509 Archived-At: > Cc: andrewjmoreton@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org > From: Paul Eggert > Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2018 10:41:43 -0700 > > On 07/17/2018 10:38 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > I don't understand why this is needed, given that Tom published a > > proposed solution for the issue. If you are bothered by possible > > run-time penalty for LP64 systems, we can use compile-time checks > > instead of run-time checks. > > It's mostly a performance concern on 32-bit platforms. Only on those built --with-wide-int, right? Because otherwise, a 32-bit 'long' is just fine with GMP. > But if nobody else cares about performance on 32-bit platforms, I'll > stop worrying too. I see no reason to worry about slightly less efficient bignums on some platforms, until GMP folks get their act together. Maybe someone should ask the GMP developers to make those changes sooner rather than later, to expedite the process. After all, they should care about Emacs, I think.