From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Juri Linkov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Compilation to native Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 15:57:57 +0200 Organization: JURTA Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <87brmnr7h6.fsf@mail.jurta.org> References: <87eks0654s.fsf@sno.mundell.ukfsn.org> <87n06bp4ng.fsf@sno.mundell.ukfsn.org> <8765cwkejr.fsf@mail.jurta.org> <871xnkcurc.fsf@sno.mundell.ukfsn.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1080051032 7870 80.91.224.253 (23 Mar 2004 14:10:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 23 Mar 2004 14:10:32 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 23 15:10:25 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1B5mbo-00056f-00 for ; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 15:10:24 +0100 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1B5mbo-0000Jm-00 for ; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 15:10:24 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1B5mbX-0008GE-Bl for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 09:10:07 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.30) id 1B5mZ2-0007CS-K0 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 09:07:32 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.30) id 1B5mYU-00070A-SL for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 09:07:30 -0500 Original-Received: from [66.33.219.4] (helo=spork.dreamhost.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1B5mSz-0005oJ-7m for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 09:01:17 -0500 Original-Received: from mail.jurta.org (80-235-40-249-dsl.mus.estpak.ee [80.235.40.249]) by spork.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9076111DC0E; Tue, 23 Mar 2004 06:01:10 -0800 (PST) Original-To: Matthew Mundell In-Reply-To: <871xnkcurc.fsf@sno.mundell.ukfsn.org> (Matthew Mundell's message of "22 Mar 2004 23:44:07 +0000") User-Agent: Gnus/5.110002 (No Gnus v0.2) Emacs/21.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:20783 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:20783 > I only wondered why the TODO entry favoured CCL, as it was simpler to > try the byte code first. The changes to function calling required for > the compiled byte code would count towards a similar effort for CCL. As far as this TODO entry speaks about compilation, it is much simpler to compile CCL than Emacs Lisp. And AFAIU, it suggests first to try compiling CCL bytecode to native code as opposed to compiling Emacs Lisp bytecode to native code. -- Juri Linkov http://www.jurta.org/emacs/