From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: 23.0.50 compile problem on Windows XP Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2007 10:30:47 +0200 Message-ID: References: <47035169.8070402@gnu.org> <4703869F.6070909@gnu.org> <47038922.10105@gnu.org> <4705652C.5070803@gnu.org> <4705F197.7020909@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1191573086 32155 80.91.229.12 (5 Oct 2007 08:31:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2007 08:31:26 +0000 (UTC) Cc: sridhar_ml@yahoo.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Jason Rumney Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Oct 05 10:31:14 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1IdiaW-0002MC-AS for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 10:31:12 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdiaR-0000Km-GJ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 04:31:07 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IdiaH-0000Ia-2d for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 04:30:57 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1IdiaF-0000I6-7l for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 04:30:56 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1IdiaE-0000I0-V4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 04:30:55 -0400 Original-Received: from heller.inter.net.il ([213.8.233.23]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Idia9-0004Bt-W8; Fri, 05 Oct 2007 04:30:50 -0400 Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 (IGLD-80-230-18-77.inter.net.il [80.230.18.77]) by heller.inter.net.il (MOS 3.7.3a-GA) with ESMTP id DTY58173 (AUTH halo1); Fri, 5 Oct 2007 10:30:47 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <4705F197.7020909@gnu.org> (message from Jason Rumney on Fri, 05 Oct 2007 09:11:03 +0100) X-Detected-Kernel: FreeBSD 4.7-5.2 (or MacOS X 10.2-10.4) (2) 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: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:80278 Archived-At: > Date: Fri, 05 Oct 2007 09:11:03 +0100 > From: Jason Rumney > Cc: sridhar_ml@yahoo.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org > > In the general case, the abs macro is dangerous, as it evaluates its > argument twice. Is it really an important optimization to use a > macro for this? I don't know if it's an important optimization; probably not, although it seems to be used in the display code, where speed is important. We could replace it by an inline function, though.