From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: evaluating numbers Date: Wed, 29 Apr 2020 23:04:54 -0400 Message-ID: References: <835zjvg385.fsf@gnu.org> <83sgmyd6rw.fsf@gnu.org> <835zjucwbz.fsf@gnu.org> <628A3663-BDD3-47C5-B4F4-E260FD900691@traduction-libre.org> <83o8xla50f.fsf@gnu.org> <831rua95mg.fsf@gnu.org> <4801DEB3-937A-4777-8E99-C2CA2234F8A0@traduction-libre.org> <83eeya5yl6.fsf@gnu.org> <83imnl2sxk.fsf@gnu.org> <164231EC-D3B8-455C-8C11-AF033FB48699@traduction-libre.org> <83368n3b2y.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="14942"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: jean.christophe.helary@traduction-libre.org, eliz@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Richard Stallman Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Apr 30 05:05:35 2020 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 1jTzW3-0003mf-1a for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 30 Apr 2020 05:05:35 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49652 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jTzW2-0002sn-2Z for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 23:05:34 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:43670) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jTzVV-0002Sk-Bj for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 23:05:01 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jTzVU-0000uV-Fm for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 23:05:01 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:10888) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jTzVT-0000tQ-1D; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 23:04:59 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 60C974506FB; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 23:04:57 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 348404506F3; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 23:04:56 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1588215896; bh=S3/wzNiCnQo1+8/scbG2iy2A0bY49zxxO/epHDSfyI4=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=PDz+8bTlKi2xaFuEhe2UB9H2FXrkRMmy8k7fnf4t5sxKhBfdSFi/bPNAn1LwqVdqC 7+PZ+p9ufqtmWLo8sWreMlLf8M47zOwVmGozcObMyl8ZOt6V9kS4RJruRWg7BIMYzt d7bZ/IkFPeM071MIF17W4JvlkNbr16mYs6IAHTwbDOzO72nIsr8BSYcfjhWyxtZwqP 1KGMNTSkoNeueyzcRnBB71MVFt60Ib71hxmzoLN1BHy4xcJrG+9J2vdJeRhdQXUkBZ JEeC8VstmSi5KlMFz3gVw7tLBJBsRbiWomwHcysDLJwMYl8OSUMvnxPPLnci1nJ1Nz cPpXHoEV1BsOQ== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [216.154.3.202]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 96A811202FA; Wed, 29 Apr 2020 23:04:55 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Wed, 29 Apr 2020 22:34:55 -0400") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/04/29 21:08:16 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:248210 Archived-At: > > We do know the answer to this question, since XEmacs has had a separate > > character type since even before it was renamed to XEmacs. > That would be an answer about the general design approach, but the > question I posed is about the current format of Lisp_Object. Basically: if we wanted to have characters as a distinct type, then we'd make room for it in Lisp_Object. In any case, I don't think anyone is suggesting to make such a change (and if someone proposes it, I'd object strongly. Not because I think having as a distinct type would be bad, but because it wouldn't be better, so it would be gratuitous pain). Stefan