From: Neil Jerram <neil@ossau.uklinux.net>
Cc: Dirk Herrmann <dirk@sallust.ida.ing.tu-bs.de>,
Guile Development <guile-devel@gnu.org>
Subject: Re: bug in syncase
Date: 04 Dec 2002 20:54:38 +0000 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m3adjlmrn5.fsf@laruns.ossau.uklinux.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <v4jlm35tz9z.fsf@newtonlabs.com>
>>>>> "Carl" == Carl R Witty <cwitty@newtonlabs.com> writes:
Carl> Emacs does not do memoization during eval; macros are
Carl> re-evaluated every time they are encountered. However, if
Carl> you byte-compile a function (typically by byte-compiling an
Carl> entire file at install time, although it's also possible to
Carl> byte-compile an individual function at run time), macros are
Carl> expanded during the byte-compilation process.
Many thanks for this.
Carl> This means that Emacs Lisp code which is to run correctly
Carl> both interpreted and compiled must be insensitive to when or
Carl> how often macro expansion is done; such code -- which
Carl> includes virtually all distributed Emacs Lisp code, I would
Carl> think -- would also work if macro expansion were memoized.
A persuasive constraint to have ... except only for the interactive
development angle ...
Carl> The interactive development process would be different,
Carl> though; for a complete clone of Emacs, including the
Carl> development process, you would want to have an eval that
Carl> does no memoization and some sort of separate compilation
Carl> phase.
I don't quite understand. By `interactive development process', do
you mean what a user does with `C-x C-e', or something more specific
to the core Emacs developers?
If the former, I don't see how you reach your conclusion. What if you
redefine a macro that was in use by a byte-compiled function? It
seems to me that what you need to handle this scenario is a
recompilation protocol. How does a non-memoizing eval and separate
compilation help?
Neil
_______________________________________________
Guile-devel mailing list
Guile-devel@gnu.org
http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2002-12-04 20:54 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 20+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <Pine.GSO.4.05.10211161811180.9959-100000@sallust.ida.ing.tu-bs.de>
2002-11-17 12:11 ` bug in syncase Neil Jerram
2002-11-20 17:33 ` Dirk Herrmann
2002-11-21 17:53 ` Dirk Herrmann
2002-11-21 20:22 ` Neil Jerram
2002-11-23 10:53 ` Dirk Herrmann
2002-11-24 9:25 ` Neil Jerram
2002-11-24 10:33 ` Dirk Herrmann
2002-12-04 1:12 ` Rob Browning
2002-11-23 13:01 ` Marius Vollmer
2002-12-04 18:27 ` Carl R. Witty
2002-12-04 20:54 ` Neil Jerram [this message]
2002-12-09 20:28 ` Carl R. Witty
2002-11-14 11:59 Dirk Herrmann
2002-11-15 4:10 ` Clinton Ebadi
2002-11-15 9:29 ` Lynn Winebarger
2002-11-15 9:34 ` Lynn Winebarger
2002-11-15 19:25 ` Neil Jerram
2002-11-16 18:39 ` Marius Vollmer
2002-11-17 10:54 ` Neil Jerram
2002-11-17 20:07 ` Marius Vollmer
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/guile/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=m3adjlmrn5.fsf@laruns.ossau.uklinux.net \
--to=neil@ossau.uklinux.net \
--cc=dirk@sallust.ida.ing.tu-bs.de \
--cc=guile-devel@gnu.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).