From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Pip Cet Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: MPS: weak hash tables Date: Fri, 05 Jul 2024 12:08:55 +0000 Message-ID: References: <-plQctKgNkvp-LJ9ov2QAiXQKxd9V-hI0yz_opRGxQtbknubCjH4rH2-ymgbw_Qr1ZhB1rtlmiEW8XtuIVNr7nR_Yj20AH6WkH6kUGp68g0=@protonmail.com> <_mNcR6ailVKpYHLxgfo_tJlYGeR0AQIzQWluspYYp5_g5pIIKkHLNfFkklQQgOKNiVW8jn8NS3i2dJ7_B2Qyx9v-Dq3MQ9mP8HNL30UWsqY=@protonmail.com> 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="12891"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Helmut Eller , Eli Zaretskii , Emacs Devel To: =?utf-8?Q?Gerd_M=C3=B6llmann?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 05 15:28:22 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 1sPiz5-0002x1-77 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 05 Jul 2024 15:28:19 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sPiyW-0006Uk-Cy; Fri, 05 Jul 2024 09:27:44 -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 1sPhkS-00016C-TV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Jul 2024 08:09:09 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-40133.protonmail.ch ([185.70.40.133]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1sPhkO-0003vk-Fl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Jul 2024 08:09:08 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail3; t=1720181340; x=1720440540; bh=XRTXUq+HwuVdsl5Ye7jGtCozIw1rlR1l4uCek/45Xwo=; 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; b=FGBeXHv7eh8UpKYp5BXbo0pqvsmVKuL+FGuSVG//zJEnC77X8lSA7ByvH3vaEX14B aiJhThRn04+JfD22Znd8V/KMp1XszQX5FvPCOgtEMdbmTQj7aEn+Z4b+ASVB7wdWV7 PUZUHFPOW5cRqallLNjxhvoomLcw5t/XPHLv7BdMZ8ef4AKCZ0VSjYjEF50MqIiAfh QXSs5JR76QOB5/wynqk2AjU0+zaaSkFI5dL+oODwNDbuCBx69igk533eaOTOkJ7XSZ dCeYgAl3okYTHoMv0MLu4vAVni2sv6GSm95RJ6V5lvNVvSJkPmyr69sBZ7ps7966YK MKg/efFCGg25A== In-Reply-To: Feedback-ID: 112775352:user:proton X-Pm-Message-ID: 0a373e40a539f299fa97ad426e13c391cc9a25ff Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.70.40.133; envelope-from=pipcet@protonmail.com; helo=mail-40133.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_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Mailman-Approved-At: Fri, 05 Jul 2024 09:27:38 -0400 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:321392 Archived-At: On Friday, July 5th, 2024 at 03:50, Gerd M=C3=B6llmann wrote: > Pip Cet pipcet@protonmail.com writes: > > > > Ah, I thought what you wrote in the other mail was related to the > > > IA-32 software emulation shit^Wrequirement, sorry. > > > > It's both: > > > > 1. change the IGC header to be a uint64_t, because bitfields don't alwa= ys behave as expected. > > 2. use the low-order bits to distinguish extended external extra depend= ency headers from ordinary one-word headers. (This fixes the remaining IA32= bug) Except that a uint64_t is two 32 bit words, and they both must be non-align= ed. How horrible. At least we've excluded WIDE_EMACS_INT :-) > Honesty demands that I add that that would also be good for me: I said > right from the start that I won't maintain anything and lately that I > really really feel I need to have a break from this MPS stuff, so I'd > love if you could take over and realize yoiur ideas. My priority would be getting the branch merged. If it isn't, it'll bit-rot,= I'm afraid. I realize it's too soon to ask for a final decision on that (w= hich would be made on merge day, presumably), but I've found myself using m= y IGC emacs -Q when my vanilla Emacs is stuck in GC, so it's not like it do= esn't work at all. And, yes, I realize there's a lot of work to be done for= that... Feature/bug-wise, what's still missing? key-or-value weakness (haven't slep= t enough yet to decide whether to merge), sure, but is that essential? The = signal handler stuff is fixable, I'm convinced. I've got a bug fix for what= I hope to be the very last bug with the IA-32 stuff. There are two very mi= nor bugs (there are Lisp_Objects in the wrong part of pure space, and igc_r= ealloc_ambig doesn't park the arena--one-liners really). The two major fixm= es concern native compilation and the byte code stack, right? I'm perfectly= happy to leave unnecessarily ambiguous references ambiguous for now. My next question would be: are there any planned big changes which would to= uch too many files on the master branch? The one I can think of is I would = like to move the IGC header to live in struct Lisp_Cons/Lisp_String/Lisp_Sy= mbol/Lisp_Float and in union vectorlike_header, and make client =3D=3D base= . I believe this would also make things easier for other GC approaches whic= h would also need some sort of header. No real problem for non-native-comp = builds: the problem with this is changing these structs requires adjusting = comp.c, which rebuilds them in libgccjit calls. I don't think that's very h= ard to do either, but it's potentially subtle and I'm planning to write And= rea about it. So, yes, I'd love that too, but I may be underestimating the difficulty of = getting this merged. Pip