From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Pip Cet via "Emacs development discussions." Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Some experience with the igc branch Date: Sun, 22 Dec 2024 17:41:47 +0000 Message-ID: <87ldw7fwet.fsf@protonmail.com> References: <87o713wwsi.fsf@telefonica.net> Reply-To: Pip Cet Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="37694"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, =?utf-8?Q?Gerd_M=C3=B6llmann?= , Helmut Eller , Andrea Corallo To: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Dec 22 19:32:17 2024 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 1tPQkT-0009gF-LN for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 22 Dec 2024 19:32:17 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tPQjV-0003IP-FU; Sun, 22 Dec 2024 13:31:17 -0500 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 1tPPxm-00024q-9I for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 22 Dec 2024 12:41:58 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-40134.protonmail.ch ([185.70.40.134]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1tPPxk-0003UY-5T; Sun, 22 Dec 2024 12:41:58 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail3; t=1734889310; x=1735148510; bh=CMeME3U5Y5rIKPubECjdKn9JM7b+EFVSL19zUJwm8C4=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID: Message-ID:BIMI-Selector:List-Unsubscribe:List-Unsubscribe-Post; b=QmgC7j0RiMj6z759nbailDibP0ZEPjKeqCH0+ZHfAzE7D8dbTC52QZ6nSBw3IUTiA ddWUTOvdRs8AyQLtE2jDeELGdCaIx+gh6tQ/Xm04SaFVPjiLtNmU7xrUVuxTX/FaWu wuY3WUIpSBLNqLFncem56Dzox4Yio9b7N9nyZnOlDJLop9vYFkQ8utaw1HDMdUBe8m ieexr9LplAiZDxttXNWkvslisGNURO5Lbmxqis+DlEWQolNLMngHzFzQI22MsQyWeG cXRZPbDoJQKJ40H15lGVG0DHNLiSevBAxbvulvnzRhhkEcxe1trhIuwp7ZS1G4HdIe RSQQbGTCg4oyg== In-Reply-To: <87o713wwsi.fsf@telefonica.net> Feedback-ID: 112775352:user:proton X-Pm-Message-ID: 4e42ec1a23910c27689b398583fb4d2d1cc261d7 Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.70.40.134; envelope-from=pipcet@protonmail.com; helo=mail-40134.protonmail.ch X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 22 Dec 2024 13:31:13 -0500 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:326877 Archived-At: =C3=93scar Fuentes writes: > With igc the pauses are still there, but they much shorter and > predictable, they no longer distract me from thinking on what I'm > writing, which is a huge improvement. I suspect that some of those > pauses are not related to garbage collection (executing code and moving > data also takes time.) Quite possible. Even if it is GC, please keep in mind that MPS has many settings which you can play with, and it can improve things a lot. It's not too early to become a fan of the scratch/igc branch, but it is too early to reject it for performance reasons. It's a "heads you lose, tails = I win" situation, I guess. > TL/DR: now I enjoy using Emacs with this setup and I'm no longer tempted > to switch to other editors for this type of work. I think this is an important point: ultimately, it's about having daily drivers. We need to remove the remaining impediments for that: 1. The signal issue. I don't have a good way to fix this and make everyone happy, but I do have a solution which hasn't caused a crash for me in quite a while. It may be good enough. 2. no-purespace. Merging that into scratch/igc would help, well, me. What do others think? 3. bytecode stack marking. That comment raises my red-flag alert, because it sounds like we're just accepting a preventable crash at this stage rather than wanting to do anything about it. The reality, of course, is different, but I'd be happier if we refused to create a byte code object that intends to use more stack than we can guarantee we would scan. Can we do that? Pip