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 port to gcc -fcheck-pointer-bounds Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 18:20:33 +0200 Message-ID: <83indavbu6.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83indhwcx5.fsf@gnu.org> <83k1xwuwq3.fsf@gnu.org> <83efo2trwu.fsf@gnu.org> <83374hthe6.fsf@gnu.org> <1da23740-5960-9358-a46c-3b078428cb6c@cs.ucla.edu> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1513182051 26253 195.159.176.226 (13 Dec 2017 16:20:51 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 13 Dec 2017 16:20:51 +0000 (UTC) Cc: pipcet@gmail.com, Emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Paul Eggert Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Dec 13 17:20:48 2017 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 1eP9m3-0006bT-T8 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 17:20:48 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36181 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eP9mA-00081O-Vy for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 11:20:55 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50793) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eP9m0-0007zY-Pj for Emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 11:20:45 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eP9lw-0007HX-1b for Emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 11:20:44 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:39440) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1eP9lv-0007HG-Ue; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 11:20:39 -0500 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=2522 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1eP9lv-0006Qy-FE; Wed, 13 Dec 2017 11:20:39 -0500 In-reply-to: <1da23740-5960-9358-a46c-3b078428cb6c@cs.ucla.edu> (message from Paul Eggert on Tue, 12 Dec 2017 15:35:01 -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:221006 Archived-At: > Cc: pipcet@gmail.com, Emacs-devel@gnu.org > From: Paul Eggert > Date: Tue, 12 Dec 2017 15:35:01 -0800 > > Here's another way to think about it. Our current practice of defaulting > to --enable-check-lisp-object-type for developers is an outgrowth of the > fact that integer Lisp_Objects are so error-prone. Unfortunately, this > practice is dicey in its own right, as it means developers are dealing > with different object code than non-developers. I would favor going back > to the old practice of disabling --enable-check-lisp-object-type by > default, even for developers, once we've shaken out the change that I > just installed. That way, developers and non-developers will default to > more-similar machine code. But using a (fake) pointer is only marginally safer than using an integer, isn't it?