From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Prickliness of the "invalid byte code" stuff Date: Tue, 18 Jun 2019 08:14:59 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87tvcq9b0w.fsf@igel.home> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="26074"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Paul Eggert , Richard Stallman , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "T.V Raman" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jun 18 14:18:09 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hdD3v-0006eG-Vf for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 14:18:08 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56490 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hdD3u-0003o5-M2 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 08:18:06 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:56936) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.86_2) (envelope-from ) id 1hdD10-0002fT-Uv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 08:15:07 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hdD0z-0007DY-Ur for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 08:15:06 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:31387) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hdD0y-00079b-Kl; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 08:15:05 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 1C48A443AD6; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 08:15:02 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 00CEB443AD1; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 08:15:01 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1560860101; bh=rAQ+SU4UysWra1REbHLCy+TTuMB4GrnjH59qo7REIdM=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=iRw1/mrW193HufZ0K/zn/qd3OKeTbFT/aTEet4FDvjoBeKvu+N9FtZLtiYHivITYq UF2uAM+6Vm7tJhJad8aRLf7Cg+3Uu+hPq3gr1IKfACRzYzrjnn+o/jk1r4ZuylCrlA FLFxr+sECrKkqXgWepbs6VLjkj4rOBevxv1TaUaaupD03beH5YsrpLPCE0l0iwsYp0 XL4CuBNCC6qkjIAZBgcD8xsZbb1CqpYnCbfMrscgPl1Rc5mSGzzHKpnMGHxN4o6iMy ZK1Da9LvuosQa3ntFbwt+F4U07BVON62pYkeWK21pf7Pk0ZQyoHmFMfT/hgQo6abQ+ dn3fLGh/61aiA== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [157.52.10.58]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id A7A87120A72; Tue, 18 Jun 2019 08:15:00 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (T. V. Raman's message of "Mon, 17 Jun 2019 17:14:52 -0700") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 132.204.25.50 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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:237828 Archived-At: > When it was originally introduced, I remember byte-compile-dynamic made > a significant difference when loading large modules from which one > initially used only a few functions, it enabled lazy-loading. That was the idea, yes. > Would that still matter in today's emacs, or have things moved along far > enough that it wont matter? My impression is that the gain is negligible on today's hardware (and I consider my 2007-era Thinkpad to be part of "today's hardware). Maybe I could be convinced otherwise by actual benchmarks, of course. Stefan