From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: cwitty@newtonlabs.com (Carl R. Witty) Newsgroups: gmane.lisp.guile.devel Subject: Re: bug in syncase Date: 09 Dec 2002 12:28:05 -0800 Sender: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1039475750 15795 80.91.224.249 (9 Dec 2002 23:15:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 9 Dec 2002 23:15:50 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Guile Development Return-path: Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 18LX7o-00045v-00 for ; Tue, 10 Dec 2002 00:15:45 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 18LUZE-0000L0-07 for guile-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 15:31:52 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 18LUYt-0000KQ-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 15:31:31 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 18LUYr-0000KF-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 15:31:30 -0500 Original-Received: from dsl254-046-113.sea1.dsl.speakeasy.net ([216.254.46.113] helo=quasar.newtonlabs.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 18LUYr-0000Jy-00 for guile-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 09 Dec 2002 15:31:29 -0500 Original-Received: from bogomips.newtonlabs.com (bogomips [10.0.0.5])MAA29028; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 12:28:06 -0800 Original-Received: (from cwitty@localhost) by bogomips.newtonlabs.com (8.9.3/8.9.3/Debian/GNU) id MAA25585; Mon, 9 Dec 2002 12:28:06 -0800 Original-To: Neil Jerram In-Reply-To: Neil Jerram's message of "04 Dec 2002 20:54:38 +0000" Original-Lines: 30 X-Mailer: Gnus v5.4.61/Emacs 19.34 Original-cc: Dirk Herrmann X-BeenThere: guile-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5 Precedence: list List-Id: Developers list for Guile, the GNU extensibility library List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: guile-devel-bounces+guile-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.lisp.guile.devel:1812 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.lisp.guile.devel:1812 Neil Jerram writes: > 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? I meant `C-x C-e' (although I would have said `M-C-x'). > 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? Usually when I'm developing an Emacs Lisp package that's simple enough to fit in a single file, I will load the whole thing in interpreted mode (typically by loading the file and using M-x eval-current-buffer). At this point, I know that no macros I defined in this file are used by a byte-compiled function, so I can safely redefine macros. (Of course, things would be different if the package were sufficiently performance-critical that parts needed to be byte-compiled even during development.) Carl Witty _______________________________________________ Guile-devel mailing list Guile-devel@gnu.org http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/guile-devel