From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ihor Radchenko Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Type declarations in Elisp (was: [External] : Re: Shrinking the C core) Date: Mon, 21 Aug 2023 08:54:36 +0000 Message-ID: <87il984vxv.fsf@localhost> References: <20230809094655.793FC18A4654@snark.thyrsus.com> <87il9owg0f.fsf@yahoo.com> <87fs4pkkqi.fsf@dataswamp.org> <87jztzkgct.fsf@dataswamp.org> <87y1if8j8t.fsf@linux-m68k.org> <87y1ifi9fv.fsf@dataswamp.org> <87zg2uqdmv.fsf@localhost> <87edk3gbh3.fsf@dataswamp.org> <87jztvnuyb.fsf@localhost> <875y5bdutt.fsf@dataswamp.org> <87y1i6e1uh.fsf@localhost> <874jkub40o.fsf@dataswamp.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="12206"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Emanuel Berg , "emacs-devel@gnu.org" To: Drew Adams Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Aug 21 10:54:46 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qY0gL-0002fK-Cd for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2023 10:54:41 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qY0ft-0002sQ-El; Mon, 21 Aug 2023 04:54:13 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qY0fq-0002s7-Sp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2023 04:54:11 -0400 Original-Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qY0fo-0005Zy-9O for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 21 Aug 2023 04:54:10 -0400 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9C03E24002A for ; Mon, 21 Aug 2023 10:54:06 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1692608046; bh=RYQsv2w1ePpVRo5PHEhHBoxYfWjIK4WCbbEQdeQrDR8=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:From; b=KqOQ8kQfSN4L+MZ/wfX0b2ngwugXJBKonxlfvcW69N2j5M7LRZiB/EiwTWt93/PaH 2VGHB/75puSvsCHwHDLFjOCgKtaGJPfQsWiQB2iTEYO31YzVHT49+jwDZqxtEw7UjQ nnD1M/VIaKr4kApZ8whrKkDTLbb5X3b+eu9dA+RgRKMWHduO1vv5UJpPN899IAQYxQ hgQU9wrpKjhO8JVJjBluDS7WApQVo176yibnV3hqAM6Meod08hAFbrdZJQrjUwNqx8 Z6SlJBiw/w+s172Q4kJgr85F/658SdTn3usKZWagvw3FZKEGodHF6HxF7S9GUgL62z NvfEHgtPD53uQ== Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4RTmVj5H2Hz9rxP; Mon, 21 Aug 2023 10:54:05 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.67.36.65; envelope-from=yantar92@posteo.net; helo=mout01.posteo.de X-Spam_score_int: -33 X-Spam_score: -3.4 X-Spam_bar: --- X-Spam_report: (-3.4 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=-1, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URI_DOTEDU=1.999 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:309040 Archived-At: Drew Adams writes: >> So the answer to the question, Why is SBCL faster? >> is "optimizations". And the answer to the question, Why don't >> we have those optimizations? is "they are not portable"? > > https://www.cs.cmu.edu/Groups/AI/html/cltl/clm/node103.html#SECTION001300000000000000000 > > Common Lisp is a standard. Different implementations > of it should respect the standard, but the standard > allows for different behaviors to some extent, esp. > wrt performance. CL has multiple ways of declaring > different levels of optimization, which a given > implementation can support or not. I am wondering if type, ftype, and inline declarations could be added to Elisp. Native compilation already uses a fixed set of ftype declarations, but it cannot be modified and cannot be declared per-defun. -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode contributor, Learn more about Org mode at . Support Org development at , or support my work at