From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Christopher Dimech Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Shrinking the C core Date: Thu, 10 Aug 2023 03:47:01 +0200 Message-ID: References: <20230809094655.793FC18A4654@snark.thyrsus.com> <87il9owg0f.fsf@yahoo.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="18657"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Po Lu , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: esr@thyrsus.com Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Aug 10 03:48:03 2023 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 1qTumQ-0004ab-Ro for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 10 Aug 2023 03:48:02 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qTulb-0007LA-LO; Wed, 09 Aug 2023 21:47:11 -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 1qTulZ-0007Kn-Rp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2023 21:47:09 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.15.15]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qTulY-0003tw-0W for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Aug 2023 21:47:09 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=gmx.com; s=s31663417; t=1691632021; x=1692236821; i=dimech@gmx.com; bh=cp/DK+zN0ssYXcYa+0SwJrYGSG1+LjPlcIwqxItT+s8=; h=X-UI-Sender-Class:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:References; b=I3yRyuo6aCvYbZbg7OuWhCAZB+hcqXCNB1BJ7LuG4aPH3J1n3LYTga6GPvcHb+9dA7LO6yB PsoV5FC2ykN2QstJkZdsupfrFpasjW3gFWr0BGYWByeLEIzbWlFGae+MVRZB2DHTp1WweEOFi x2U7NLbtCeeK2r0qOfgx0p0hevrvJuj8j3tm1OJfn5PLLWsInyqWbEIEgfmew7CW8EmvM3KIc qJTnVJ7TMREGoc1Bs3HWMYpPsPte5RqA5cO3k+4NYuK3xOzmRqmp3FpgE3oOgqN4w9RCAnEaZ iK1qm1UczjOLuLYb4d369qNm8vfiNi148U288bX9AvVem/6OHZwg== X-UI-Sender-Class: 724b4f7f-cbec-4199-ad4e-598c01a50d3a Original-Received: from [141.8.81.247] ([141.8.81.247]) by web-mail.gmx.net (3c-app-mailcom-bs16.server.lan [172.19.170.184]) (via HTTP); Thu, 10 Aug 2023 03:47:01 +0200 Importance: normal Sensitivity: Normal In-Reply-To: X-UI-Message-Type: mail X-Priority: 3 X-Provags-ID: V03:K1:4D3v4Jrj/K27Cguw87iyfNVRVJpOCQLm/AK+i20q7Lv9cj9DACOahaYJBptHCNB+sdvuM Sf1kl9oTVSGmgiTdM2S5axseJYGTMntSgq3RYPVrWKqrRq/kkc/LzJGzl361hG8PF50mF/vuDL2n ffdh/8DVbz5LLMx6IGGGBKleoQBxoMIpoKfdpQiQUkV40L7fGtpEKVDTQMCsaohPymjshaTBK8Io c5JhvOfiX2cqp8FOqei3p5JyPpFvKBv0oEUJBTO4cEF7XsLTJlOQ/jg2yi1RPowujVo0O26GiIfz 0Q= UI-OutboundReport: notjunk:1;M01:P0:P5MBqEjjcNk=;A0FclEdi+4InuZgndEiqS7m3A4D 3eeJJMqkjMipGBQ7EvxENYERy6RZeWwa3Fu2jIHbkGqBSYUmB3IrYnnvNTWrmAxnfUd4R7Eda HZNoGtWxqAyCfeNeZH+acna77Ki82csZWUlh337ZV8IFXSr6j3/pPsOdVSSRLkoFnYAQ1tzup zrlc6sD0TlehCdmQ/JcZR3UvcR6ao5SsUTAeCrb0HHTQ9aUnK8Z9FJPnY3qw7GDl59GGYc1Ad 4Ourjp2q+f/MQy0e8JsAgbdRbKNYG2D4o+7y+tLqvyiNwII+IOooG1L+jnWD+B4JQasimEXQf MMtxsn7eHFVxzDfOSl9GNjHVIb7MKJaTx8jyoTKXe39T8k/LQj38Db4WvWOG/CkuGK03daEaJ OosejAWTSRe7Od7YEc6iIjMypy830KutSa6AQ4bX2OI9AZRqfkN5bXw3o2kMW96KjXWRuKtUl j9zWcmS50xnBI6XmqUn3yE71vDwF6fFFWzBCWQlqlxY7Rua19n5dRhIR9ttPB5txU8b7LGmXR esiwpNmeiKSCvyjZ7gSRk8sNs33haw6OWNkankEKMXsQVNfud1Ztoyv89N3p8vm99PFy7kXlc RCieEGKcXiG+L4aZ8Y0qwUR+vRLmkiXgjVy0uEGnCcvnnkTsf7teKVyvrs+skFNaaZ+S8B+lu bWXapjO/oZ9l+I/sKHWc2H0u7GXFYHI4GnRaGxayL/oBGPsXU6/qktw0IYLI/iKiQvt09NOTb QAKOjSM4pZpuTu+rojsbMgYILcbTc+zVu4/oUvcDJLKb0SRgK/qaP+p6ZHXlHbwYOUlyotXZ Received-SPF: pass client-ip=212.227.15.15; envelope-from=dimech@gmx.com; helo=mout.gmx.net X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 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_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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:308498 Archived-At: > Sent: Thursday, August 10, 2023 at 1:19 PM > From: "Eric S. Raymond" > To: "Po Lu" > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > Subject: Re: Shrinking the C core > > Po Lu : > > "Eric S. Raymond" writes: > > > > > When I first worked on Emacs code in the 1980s Lisp was already fast > > > enough, and machine speeds have gone up by something like 10^3 since= . > > > I plain don't believe the "slower" part can be an issue on modern > > > hardware, not even on tiny SBCs. > > > > Can you promise the same, if your changes are not restricted to one or > > two functions in fileio.c, but instead pervade throughout C source? > > Yes, in fact, I can. Because if by some miracle we were able to > instantly rewrite the entirety of Emacs in Python (which I'm not > advocating, I chose it because it's the slowest of the major modern > scripting languages) basic considerations of clocks per second would > predict it to run a *dead minimum* of two orders of magnitude faster > than the Emacs of, say, 1990. > > And 1990 Emacs was already way fast enough for the human eye and > brain, which can't even register interface lag of less than 0.17 > seconds (look up the story of Jef Raskin and how he exploited this > psychophysical fact in the design of the Canon Cat sometime; it's very > instructive). The human auditory system can perceive finer timeslices, > down to about 0.02s in skilled musicians, but we're not using elisp > for audio signal processing. > > If you take away nothing else from this conversation, at least get it > through your head that "more Lisp might make Emacs too slow" is a > deeply, *deeply* silly idea. It's 2023 and the only ways you can make > a user-facing program slow enough for response lag to be noticeable > are disk latency on spinning rust, network round-trips, or operations > with a superlinear big-O in critical paths. Mere interpretive overhead > won't do it. > > > Finally, you haven't addressed the remainder of the reasons I itemized= . > > They were too obvious, describing problems that competent software > engineers know how to prevent or hedge against, and you addressed me > as though I were a n00b that just fell off a cabbage truck. It's a habit of his. Can't fix without blowing his fuse. > My earliest contributions to Emacs were done so long ago that they > predated the systematic Changelog convention; have you heard the > expression "teaching your grandmother to suck eggs"? My patience for > that sort of thing is limited. > -- > Eric S. Raymond > > > >