From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Building Emacs overflowed pure space Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 15:37:05 -0400 Message-ID: References: <7dbe73ed0607180138x35e9d9bft3e42f20cb369795c@mail.gmail.com> <200607181929.k6IJTZN9028639@jane.dms.auburn.edu> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1153510769 26950 80.91.229.2 (21 Jul 2006 19:39:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 21 Jul 2006 19:39:29 +0000 (UTC) Cc: mathias.dahl@gmail.com, teirllm@dms.auburn.edu, ralphm@members.fsf.org, mituharu@math.s.chiba-u.ac.jp, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 21 21:39:26 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G40qD-0002sc-Sy for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 21 Jul 2006 21:39:18 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G40qD-0006FJ-BF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 21 Jul 2006 15:39:17 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1G40oA-0005OV-3V for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Jul 2006 15:37:10 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1G40o9-0005O3-BO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Jul 2006 15:37:09 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1G40o8-0005Nr-TC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 21 Jul 2006 15:37:08 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1G40oa-0005LS-SS; Fri, 21 Jul 2006 15:37:37 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.34) id 1G40o5-0007ue-SG; Fri, 21 Jul 2006 15:37:05 -0400 Original-To: Stefan Monnier In-reply-to: (message from Stefan Monnier on Fri, 21 Jul 2006 08:57:47 -0400) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:57443 Archived-At: > No it wouldn't. With my change in the macro, compilation of a single > source file, indeed all compilation in a single Emacs session, would > use only one symbol for this. Well, that's only true if the change in the reader only applies to dolist. If it applies more generally, it may conflate distinct symbols used in *other* macros. Perhaps we are thinking of different kinds of change. What I have in mind would only avoid splitting of one symbol (as inserted in macro expansions) into multiple symbols in the process of writing the compiled code into a file and reading it again. That can't do any harm.