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: Certain numbers of special forms cause changing behaviour on function calls in --batch Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2016 18:04:07 +0300 Message-ID: <83mvlun6zc.fsf@gnu.org> References: <8760stvwzp.fsf@web.de> <834m8cvu9p.fsf@gnu.org> <87h9cbpw61.fsf@web.de> <83wpl7v1sg.fsf@gnu.org> <87a8i2dfe3.fsf@web.de> <83poqyvh58.fsf@gnu.org> <87shvu1ixp.fsf@web.de> <8360spvn6i.fsf@gnu.org> <8760sjn5me.fsf@web.de> <871t37n51y.fsf@web.de> <8337nmon4l.fsf@gnu.org> <87mvluomaz.fsf@web.de> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1467817613 14230 80.91.229.3 (6 Jul 2016 15:06:53 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 6 Jul 2016 15:06:53 +0000 (UTC) Cc: me@wilfred.me.uk, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Michael Heerdegen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Jul 06 17:06:50 2016 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 1bKoPY-0005dw-Ac for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 06 Jul 2016 17:06:48 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34072 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bKoPX-00034x-G1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 06 Jul 2016 11:06:47 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53300) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bKoNK-00010D-QB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Jul 2016 11:04:35 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bKoNF-0004XZ-2q for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Jul 2016 11:04:29 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:35401) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bKoNE-0004XC-WA; Wed, 06 Jul 2016 11:04:25 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:4425 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1bKoNC-0004bc-Ov; Wed, 06 Jul 2016 11:04:23 -0400 In-reply-to: <87mvluomaz.fsf@web.de> (message from Michael Heerdegen on Wed, 06 Jul 2016 16:47:48 +0200) 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:205257 Archived-At: > From: Michael Heerdegen > Cc: me@wilfred.me.uk, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Wed, 06 Jul 2016 16:47:48 +0200 > > Eli Zaretskii writes: > > > Did the experiments with the compiled simple.elc load it into a > > running session, or did you re-dump Emacs after byte-compiling > > simple.el? > > No, I was lazy and loaded it into the running session. I can repeat the > test with re-dumping if you think it could change the behavior. At this point, I think we have no idea what could change the behavior. These differences shouldn't happen, they seem to point to some macro somewhere. So more data points might help, yes.