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: [Emacs-diffs] trunk r114593: * lisp.h (eassert): Don't use 'assume'. Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 10:00:15 +0300 Message-ID: <83iox4pa0w.fsf@gnu.org> References: <52576305.9000703@dancol.org> <52579C68.1040904@cs.ucla.edu> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1381474865 3882 80.91.229.3 (11 Oct 2013 07:01:05 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 07:01:05 +0000 (UTC) Cc: dancol@dancol.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Paul Eggert Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Oct 11 09:01:07 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1VUWig-0000cj-9K for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 09:01:06 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:52743 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VUWif-0003U8-U2 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 03:01:05 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42860) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VUWiC-00035m-7g for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 03:00:42 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VUWi6-0001eM-2l for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 03:00:35 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout21.012.net.il ([80.179.55.169]:63566) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VUWi5-0001eI-Rz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 03:00:30 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout21.012.net.il by a-mtaout21.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0MUH00E00SQ3C700@a-mtaout21.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 10:00:28 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout21.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0MUH00EPMSSSBO10@a-mtaout21.012.net.il>; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 10:00:28 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: <52579C68.1040904@cs.ucla.edu> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 X-Received-From: 80.179.55.169 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:164075 Archived-At: > Date: Thu, 10 Oct 2013 23:36:24 -0700 > From: Paul Eggert > > Daniel Colascione wrote: > > By merging eassert_and_assume with eassert, then removing the assume from eassert, you've essentially removed calls to assume and pessimized the code. > > OK, in trunk bzr 114622 I restored eassert_and_assume > (under the shorter name 'eassume'), but can you measure > how much performance you're gaining with this change? > The eassume macro is tricky to use (as it sometimes makes > performance worse) so I'd rather omit it if any > performance gains are insignificant. I'm also curious as to why this is needed. Again, 'assume' is an optimization device, and 'eassert' is not normally compiled in optimized builds. What are the use cases for this?