GNU bug report logs - #64712
29.0.92; Emacs 29 with native compilation compiles cl-loaddefs.el on every startup

Previous Next

Package: emacs;

Reported by: Stephen Molitor <stephen.molitor <at> icloud.com>

Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2023 16:19:02 UTC

Severity: normal

Tags: notabug, wontfix

Found in version 29.0.92

Done: Stefan Kangas <stefankangas <at> gmail.com>

Bug is archived. No further changes may be made.

Full log


View this message in rfc822 format

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Stefan Kangas <stefankangas <at> gmail.com>
Cc: dmitry <at> gutov.dev, acorallo <at> gnu.org, stephen.molitor <at> icloud.com, 64712 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#64712: 29.0.92; Emacs 29 with native compilation compiles cl-loaddefs.el on every startup
Date: Wed, 06 Sep 2023 14:29:47 +0300
> From: Stefan Kangas <stefankangas <at> gmail.com>
> Date: Tue, 5 Sep 2023 16:11:16 -0700
> Cc: acorallo <at> gnu.org, dmitry <at> gutov.dev, stephen.molitor <at> icloud.com, 
> 	64712 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> writes:
> 
> > Not to slow down the build unnecessarily, I think.  Basically, the
> > same reason why we have "no-byte-compile: t" in some files: you get no
> > gains from doing that, you just waste CPU time.  And the waste is much
> > more significant with native compilation.
> >
> >> I see that they were added in commit 6c11214dc112, but it doesn't
> >> explain why.
> >
> > When that happens, I always search the mailing lists around the date
> > of the commit.  In this case, I found
> >
> >   https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2022-09/msg00168.html
> >
> >> I personally can't see that it would make much of a difference if we
> >> have them or not, but maybe I'm missing something.
> >
> > If nothing else, it will slow down startup (because each .eln files
> > needs to be loaded via dlopen, as opposed to .elc that is dumped into
> > the pdumper file), albeit insignificantly.  But if we do this with all
> > the autoload files we have, that could slow down in a more tangible
> > ways.  So basically we have here two minor annoyances: you can solve
> > one, but then you "gain" the other one.
> 
> Right.  So perhaps we should just live with it, and close this as
> wontfix.

That would be my preference, given that we don't see any significantly
better alternative.




This bug report was last modified 1 year and 259 days ago.

Previous Next


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