> From: Stéphane Marks <shipmints@gmail.com>
> Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2025 10:22:15 -0400
> Cc: sbaugh@catern.com, sbaugh@janestreet.com, krisbalintona@gmail.com,
>       joostkremers@fastmail.fm, 79009@debbugs.gnu.org, visuweshm@gmail.com,
>       adam@alphapapa.net, larsi@gnus.org, arstoffel@gmail.com, ijqq@protonmail.com
>
> On Sat, Aug 2, 2025 at 9:47 AM Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
>
>  > Cc: Spencer Baugh <sbaugh@janestreet.com>,
>  >  Kristoffer Balintona <krisbalintona@gmail.com>,
>  >  Joost Kremers <joostkremers@fastmail.fm>, 79009@debbugs.gnu.org,
>  >  Visuwesh <visuweshm@gmail.com>, Adam Porter <adam@alphapapa.net>,
>  >  Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi@gnus.org>, 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.

Any progress since then?