GNU bug report logs - #51484
[PATCH] Move runtime check for recent giflib to compile time

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: help-debbugs <at> gnu.org (GNU bug Tracking System)
To: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
Subject: bug#51484: closed (Re: bug#51484: [PATCH] Move runtime check for
 recent giflib to compile time)
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 18:16:02 +0000

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

Your bug report

#51484: [PATCH] Move runtime check for recent giflib to compile time

which was filed against the emacs package, has been closed.

The explanation is attached below, along with your original report.
If you require more details, please reply to 51484 <at> debbugs.gnu.org.

-- 
51484: http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=51484
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact help-debbugs <at> gnu.org with problems

[Message part 2 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: 51484-done <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#51484: [PATCH] Move runtime check for recent giflib to
 compile time
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 11:15:04 -0700

Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:

> I generally prefer to avoid #ifdef's, so I think the change you
> propose is not for the better.  We have similar code elsewhere in
> Emacs, and there's nothing wrong with it.

OK, thanks for taking a look.  I appreciate you taking the time to
explain your thinking as well, it is most helpful.

I'm closing this bug report.

[Message part 3 (message/rfc822, inline)]

From: Stefan Kangas <stefan <at> marxist.se>
To: bug-gnu-emacs <at> gnu.org
Subject: [PATCH] Move runtime check for recent giflib to compile time
Date: Fri, 29 Oct 2021 07:42:56 -0700

Severity: wishlist

I'm looking into some bugs in how we handle gifs, and I see that we
check for GIFLIB_MAJOR at runtime.  Is there any reason not to do it at
compile-time as in the attached patch?

I expect that GCC is smart enough to see that "5 < 4" is always false
and optimize this all away, and probably also won't include unused
static variables, so maybe this doesn't matter.  But I think it's nice
to be a bit more explicit, and I guess it can't hurt to see warnings if
anyone tries using interlace_start and interlace_increment outside of
their intended use.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.