Subject: Re: bug#54079: 29.0.50; Method dispatching eratically fails

From: Alan Mackenzie <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2022 19:07:45 +0000

Hello, Eli.

On Sat, Mar 05, 2022 at 20:19:43 +0200, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Date: Sat, 5 Mar 2022 16:37:16 +0000
> > From: Alan Mackenzie <[email-masked]>
> > Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked], [email-masked]
> > 
> >    CHECK_SYMBOL (symbol);
> > +  /* If we're in a byte compilation, ensure the definition's symbols
> > +     are stripped of their positions. */
> > +  if (symbols_with_pos_enabled
> > +      && SYMBOL_WITH_POS_P (symbol)
> > +      && Ffboundp (Qbyte_run_strip_symbol_positions))
> > +    call1 (Qbyte_run_strip_symbol_positions, definition);

> The first two conditions should be in reverse order, for speedier
> code, shouldn't they?

Maybe.  A slight slowdown would happen if the first condition was true
whilst the second was not.  Yes, that could happen whilst `require'ing a
..elc file, which will happen regularly.  I'll swap them around.

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).