Subject: bug#57911: closed (Re: bug#57911: Abolish max-specpdl-size)

From: [email-masked] (GNU bug Tracking System)
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2022 17:38:02 +0000

Your bug report

#57911: Abolish max-specpdl-size

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 [email-masked].

-- 
57911: https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=57911
GNU Bug Tracking System
Contact [email-masked] with problems

Subject: Re: bug#57911: Abolish max-specpdl-size
From: Mattias Engdegård <[email-masked]>
To: Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]>
Cc: [email-masked], Lars Ingebrigtsen <[email-masked]>, Stefan Monnier <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2022 19:36:51 +0200
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>

19 sep. 2022 kl. 15.54 skrev Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]>:

>> And I take from Stefan's
>> response that he has no objections...  Eli, any comments?
> 
> No.

Thank you, pushed to master and closing.

Subject: Abolish max-specpdl-size
From: Mattias Engdegård <[email-masked]>
To: Emacs Bug Report <[email-masked]>
Date: Sun, 18 Sep 2022 13:57:22 +0200
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>

This is a proposal to abolish max-specpdl-size, the user-controllable limit on the internal specpdl stack.

It is safe to do so because unbounded specpdl growth is not possible without proportionally growing the lisp-eval-depth. Therefore, max-lisp-eval-depth suffices as a guard against runaway recursion and unreasonable memory usage as it effectively bounds the specpdl stack as well.

The change would give us some performance benefits but the biggest gain is in user convenience: currently, any code that needs deeper recursion than permitted by default has to set two variables. What values to use is often a matter of puzzlement and guessing since it is far from clear to anyone how they relate.

Why abolish max-specpdl-size rather than max-lisp-eval-depth, if they are connected? First and foremost, because the lisp-eval-depth is easier to explain and understand; the specpdl is an internal implementation detail that most Lisp users don't really have a firm grip on.

Moreover, although each Lisp call currently consumes at least one specpdl entry, this won't necessarily remain true in the future: it should be possible to eliminate that specpdl usage for gains in both speed and memory. In that case, max-specpdl-size would no longer serve as an effective recursion limit.

Concretely, the change would amount to retaining max-specpdl-size as a plain dynamic Lisp variable with no special meaning. We could obsolete it or keep it around indefinitely. A patch will come -- it's all very straightforward.