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 Lisp JIT Compiler Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 19:41:51 +0300 Message-ID: <83va8binu8.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87va8ej4o1.fsf@tromey.com> <87mutpiyz6.fsf@tromey.com> <701cd05f423e0c46595a3010f45414d0.squirrel@dancol.org> <520f536b5a603831c9a57a5f6f0978a2.squirrel@dancol.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1534351214 4106 195.159.176.226 (15 Aug 2018 16:40:14 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 16:40:14 +0000 (UTC) Cc: dancol@dancol.org, tom@tromey.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Paul Eggert Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Aug 15 18:40:09 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 1fpyq8-0000uo-Qs for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 18:40:08 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50548 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fpysD-0007dE-KM for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 12:42:17 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:52828) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fpyry-0007cr-Jt for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 12:42:08 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fpyru-0007zU-0f for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 12:42:02 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:50360) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fpyrt-0007zG-Ik; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 12:41:57 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=1517 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1fpyrt-0000sR-33; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 12:41:57 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Paul Eggert on Tue, 14 Aug 2018 15:38:44 -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:228561 Archived-At: > From: Paul Eggert > Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2018 15:38:44 -0700 > Cc: Tom Tromey , emacs-devel@gnu.org > > On 08/14/2018 02:03 PM, Daniel Colascione wrote: > > Randomly > > varying the performance of loaded elisp code to such a degree depending on > > the presence of various system tools is unacceptable > > Are you're saying you'd rather have predictably bad performance, than > have an application that sometimes has the bad performance in some > situations, and 3x better performance in other situations? I agree with Daniel here: having vastly different performance due to factors more or less out of end-user's control is bad for UX. That doesn't mean we want to have predictably bad performance, but it does mean that we should choose our JIT library so that it doesn't suffer from such issues.