From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Barry OReilly Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#15405: 24.3; #[] freezes emacs Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 15:43:29 -0400 Message-ID: References: <8361tynp73.fsf@gnu.org> <834n9inoa0.fsf@gnu.org> <871u4mcf2h.fsf@rosalinde.fritz.box> <831u4mnlit.fsf@gnu.org> <83txhilymg.fsf@gnu.org> <83ob7pmh28.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b5d4f7888632104e6d5e2a4 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1379706256 19474 80.91.229.3 (20 Sep 2013 19:44:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 19:44:16 +0000 (UTC) Cc: stephen.berman@gmx.net, 15405@debbugs.gnu.org, Leo Liu To: Stefan Monnier , dmantipov@yandex.ru Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Sep 20 21:44:19 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1VN6ck-0001Ze-0x for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 20 Sep 2013 21:44:18 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57599 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VN6cj-0007ds-CI for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 20 Sep 2013 15:44:17 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:55802) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VN6cc-0007dh-0s for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Sep 2013 15:44:14 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VN6cU-0005uI-MY for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Sep 2013 15:44:09 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:43541) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1VN6cU-0005uD-JL for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Sep 2013 15:44:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VN6cU-000729-55 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 20 Sep 2013 15:44:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Barry OReilly Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 20 Sep 2013 19:44:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 15405 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 15405-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B15405.137970621726995 (code B ref 15405); Fri, 20 Sep 2013 19:44:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 15405) by debbugs.gnu.org; 20 Sep 2013 19:43:37 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:51834 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VN6c4-00071L-UY for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 20 Sep 2013 15:43:37 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-wi0-f178.google.com ([209.85.212.178]:44742) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1VN6c3-000718-Le for 15405@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 20 Sep 2013 15:43:36 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-wi0-f178.google.com with SMTP id hn9so21631wib.5 for <15405@debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 20 Sep 2013 12:43:29 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type; bh=oEFSoloRwdK8qt2o2deLdBMhV184b16MMy7f7VeYYmQ=; b=eHFLt0Dicem9a2e35ktBKbtQknZHAK7/CAKzseqTe1Qh0ZDcy6LedH4sRq+QtaVQvo b5MbXgk0P+wsYtBAtUXHew1MtgHRrTwPg7Cwq7N2qKcnLWJgiA0FZpkA8hWmcT3GUqKW otpbpHItWh7y7bdvWcvZkTfUDhnsqvrxQJ8S+rijpWGzmtQdYUK3DwnjsQF7Rt01qR43 HbiJRUq/nQogIBagSmiJnGpP7du7EsNfSiBhRRwAclyqsmuYS0Si4VN9N3G0Pkntj3ze o2Ly+2z4AVPx/PKNrGnRGBX9p1QP+p8iRYlsumNNVvtf2Cu9wV9z2ii/YQwSWys/u0a1 1BYg== X-Received: by 10.194.10.193 with SMTP id k1mr2834395wjb.50.1379706209852; Fri, 20 Sep 2013 12:43:29 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: by 10.194.234.234 with HTTP; Fri, 20 Sep 2013 12:43:29 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:78627 Archived-At: --047d7b5d4f7888632104e6d5e2a4 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > FWIW, this behavior was introduced only recently: 24.3. It is true > for only this one Emacs release (so far). It is an incompatible > change from Emacs prior to 24.3, where (eq [] []) is nil. I found the emacs-devel thread for that: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2011-12/msg00112.html http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2012-06/msg00112.html The addition of the zero_vector was tied into other changes of vector allocation, so I don't suppose there were benchmarks specifically for the zero_vector addition? > So we should fix the code so that there are at least "one empty > vector per vector type". Thanks for the allowance of "at least". It would be good to assess the performance impact of "(eq [] []) evaluates to nil". --047d7b5d4f7888632104e6d5e2a4 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
> FWIW, this behavior was introduced only recently: 24.= 3. It is true
> for only this one Emacs release (so far). It is an in= compatible
> change from Emacs prior to 24.3, where (eq [] []) is nil= .

I found the emacs-devel thread for that:
=A0 http://lists.gnu.o= rg/archive/html/emacs-devel/2011-12/msg00112.html
=A0 http://li= sts.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2012-06/msg00112.html

The addition of the zero_vector was tied into other changes of vectorallocation, so I don't suppose there were benchmarks specifically for=
the zero_vector addition?

> So we should fix the code so that= there are at least "one empty
> vector per vector type".

Thanks for the allowance of "= ;at least". It would be good to assess the
performance impact of &q= uot;(eq [] []) evaluates to nil".

--047d7b5d4f7888632104e6d5e2a4--