From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs-diffs Digest, Vol 19, Issue 62 Date: 12 Jul 2004 15:12:00 +0200 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1089637912 22996 80.91.224.253 (12 Jul 2004 13:11:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 12 Jul 2004 13:11:52 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Mon Jul 12 15:11:46 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1Bk0aw-0005gA-00 for ; Mon, 12 Jul 2004 15:11:46 +0200 Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1Bk0av-0002hP-00 for ; Mon, 12 Jul 2004 15:11:46 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bk0dD-0005FH-UO for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Mon, 12 Jul 2004 09:14:07 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1Bk0d6-0005F3-UV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Jul 2004 09:14:01 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.33) id 1Bk0d5-0005Ek-E1 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Jul 2004 09:14:00 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.33) id 1Bk0d5-0005Eh-AQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Jul 2004 09:13:59 -0400 Original-Received: from [212.88.64.25] (helo=mail-relay.sonofon.dk) by monty-python.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Bk0af-0007BV-Vn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 12 Jul 2004 09:11:30 -0400 Original-Received: (qmail 28013 invoked from network); 12 Jul 2004 13:11:28 -0000 Original-Received: from unknown (HELO kfs-l.imdomain.dk.cua.dk) (213.83.150.2) by 0 with SMTP; 12 Jul 2004 13:11:28 -0000 Original-To: Andreas Schwab In-Reply-To: Original-Lines: 23 User-Agent: Gnus/5.09 (Gnus v5.9.0) Emacs/21.3.50 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: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:25613 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:25613 Andreas Schwab writes: > storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) writes: > > > The array is _not_ initialized, > > It is, all current uses do that (they have to due to non-MARK_STACK > architectures). And keeping it like this is a good idea anyway. The way I read the code, the arrays are _not_ initialized. And no, they don't have to be initialized due to non-MARK_STACK architectures; the code that puts data into those arrays progressively GCPROs only the initialized part of the array. And IMO, it is not a good idea to waste cpu cycles initializing (large) arrays that are subsequently filled with valid data. But if you can show me the code that INITIALIZES those arrays, I will believe you (and remove that code :-). -- Kim F. Storm http://www.cua.dk