On Sat, Aug 2, 2025 at 9:47 AM Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > Cc: Spencer Baugh , > > Kristoffer Balintona , > > Joost Kremers , 79009@debbugs.gnu.org, > > Visuwesh , Adam Porter , > > Lars Ingebrigtsen , Augusto Stoffel < > arstoffel@gmail.com>, > > ijqq@protonmail.com > > From: sbaugh@catern.com > > Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2025 22:02:56 +0000 (UTC) > > > > > My patch is self consistent as far as I can tell. > > > > > > Once we decide on if we leave equal semantics to the caller, for > example, vtable-goto-object call site first locating an object on > > > its own, then relying on eq semantics to move point, or allow users to > define -object-equal, the rest of my related changes > > > (coming shortly after we conclude this part of the discussion) have > more cache items repaired, not just these. > > > > > > We can debate simplifying the cache in a new cache-related patch, yes? > > > > Sure. If we debate it in a new patch, then don't change the cache in > > this patch. If you want to change the cache in this patch, then we have > > to debate it now. > > Can we please have an updated patch that we could discuss and perhaps > install? > I think the ball is in my court. I've been on holiday (but obv reading email) and will get back to this soon.