From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Stephen J. Turnbull" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [Emacs-diffs] trunk r114593: * lisp.h (eassert): Don't use 'assume'. Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 17:59:29 +0900 Message-ID: <87eh7si3ny.fsf@uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> References: <52576305.9000703@dancol.org> <52579C68.1040904@cs.ucla.edu> <83iox4pa0w.fsf@gnu.org> <5257AB8C.40309@dancol.org> <83eh7sp6v0.fsf@gnu.org> <5257B489.2050609@dancol.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1381482001 15469 80.91.229.3 (11 Oct 2013 09:00:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 11 Oct 2013 09:00:01 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , eggert@cs.ucla.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Daniel Colascione Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Oct 11 11:00:04 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 1VUYZo-0000dZ-8e for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 11:00:04 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:53144 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VUYZn-0008Oj-R4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 05:00:03 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39376) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VUYZd-0008OF-Lc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 05:00:01 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VUYZW-0004z5-D1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 04:59:53 -0400 Original-Received: from mgmt1.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp ([130.158.97.223]:49743) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VUYZN-0004wv-PE; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 04:59:38 -0400 Original-Received: from uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp [130.158.99.156]) by mgmt1.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix) with ESMTP id 325F13FA0A14; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 17:59:29 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: by uwakimon.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 2D038129E2C; Fri, 11 Oct 2013 17:59:29 +0900 (JST) In-Reply-To: <5257B489.2050609@dancol.org> X-Mailer: VM undefined under 21.5 (beta34) "kale" 182d01410b8d XEmacs Lucid (x86_64-unknown-linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 130.158.97.223 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:164079 Archived-At: Daniel Colascione writes: > I'd actually argue that you should almost always combine assert and > assume. You've gone through the trouble of spelling out constraints on > program execution: why not let the optimizer take advantage of that > information? I'd say +1 except that apparently optimizers are sufficiently stupid as to compile worse code when assume is present (at least that's what Paul seemed to claim).