From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Pip Cet Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Merging bignum to master Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 15:20:44 +0000 Message-ID: References: <877ekwu1mn.fsf@tromey.com> <611579fd-52f2-0104-ef82-a7a4a3929700@cs.ucla.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1534356552 11346 195.159.176.226 (15 Aug 2018 18:09:12 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 18:09:12 +0000 (UTC) Cc: tom@tromey.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: eggert@cs.ucla.edu Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Aug 15 20:09:08 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fq0EF-0002rZ-D8 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 20:09:07 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50858 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fq0GM-0004tu-2G for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 14:11:18 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46932) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fq0Fj-0004oZ-Bi for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 14:10:39 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fq0Fi-0005rX-93 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 14:10:39 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-lf1-x12b.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::12b]:37957) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fpxc6-0004BI-LJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 11:21:34 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-lf1-x12b.google.com with SMTP id a4-v6so1144447lff.5 for ; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 08:21:31 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date:message-id:subject:to :cc; bh=ZygVjPOkZYYrVvKt2FGE50zE2eI+bsmJYtLxCADkg/g=; b=X93+mu/hGUVy63ndEQ50dzeXo+kUf6ScdP9PLnf/zoDaTL34RwHi+OQy4ggShqZPOK m3xKLu+f0/DTj20Juakw3pzA3c+3Ef/EMsyUWCbQHR4hMxBMZJi6KB2TC29Q8OLxLr56 LKzMIzDsa0Fzc1gw8RSGxf3hUIcFfTn6z9hpVsaCR6a97I2J31rfsFc/ZGiYMtFdkLbO aB9IgpY7EkYG8BKlIUgVFo3I0di5Jzjg8FUHkJwcOPqQs/ohC7h3RgN8JbgK0hRVgAJZ 83XHovucrKvrtXliiRiNGBv5VbEhdsPLVMVJRa6gCdDTIkbGPlSkt7qZw/7bB6Vq73RV GYMw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=ZygVjPOkZYYrVvKt2FGE50zE2eI+bsmJYtLxCADkg/g=; b=UFP7cbXyjs8LaIf4VA+NyrrUliC/zXu2YUz7ACirVnZc+vmEz8XfL8jw5MJev/ItRJ 0vEUws9etHUzojrJ31Cv+Se74NlTGplbkP/eHie7YCw83okpOnmZCQHZdnmvDWlFruf5 rLEzCXkMjF2nkXp4apMvNmVhn1Ylgb5yhm9+u7rW8A13MK8rJr5cDybfhMaYJoeGUcjj zWzqSnsPsRA88oN/ublznP2+HiRMrJf80o//ute3uqugSi2a7GHMwN9zYsk0yRKgHEW2 23dlTRLaWU02wCcRCfzjPXS7XaXuJxmShQJT+RUVOvJqbMKdrzAmKgUBUtswQ6DEs2gp GsKQ== X-Gm-Message-State: AOUpUlFWKCeVKv1yp6u7zp85h+oM17ujigY8ly0sEeP0VIeSQZvztZd9 nz54ODT+Fl6rWm1gIk5cI9VYnxtkvcXrk0qdwOc= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA+uWPw3WGBv+DlSwji+2WDTkbskqTEKYq0AlZbgbYo7/CE5A7uZMZtg9ChW6NBPOhca4KbjzKNCa9NkYy0uVS2dFqg= X-Received: by 2002:a19:1366:: with SMTP id j99-v6mr17661015lfi.21.1534346481040; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 08:21:21 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:4864:20::12b X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:228568 Archived-At: If you really think XFIXNUMFWD is a good name, don't you at least agree that it should go with renaming other references to intfwds to fixnumfwds? Right now we have: static struct Lisp_Intfwd * XFIXNUMFWD (union Lisp_Fwd *a) { eassert (INTFWDP (a)); return &a->u_intfwd; } I still think that's clearly a case of over-eager replacement (XINT -> XFIXNUM). To have XFIXNUMFWD but INTFWDP seems obviously wrong to me. On Tue, Aug 14, 2018 at 6:01 PM Paul Eggert wrote: > > Pip Cet wrote: > > Is it intentional that int-forwarded variables are still limited to > > the fixnum range? In any case, we probably didn't want to rename > > XINTFWD to XFIXNUMFWD... > > I think some C code does assume fixnum ranges for these variables, and would > have to be inspected. Presumably we'd go to either intmax_t range or Emacs > integers (fixnums or bignums), and that might need to be thought through in a > case-by-case basis. In the meantime XFIXNUMFWD is probably a good name since > that's effectively what the code does now.