GNU bug report logs - #67141
30.0.50; Missing element in the backtrace

Previous Next

Full log

View this message in rfc822 format

From: Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>
To: Andrea Corallo <acorallo <at> gnu.org>
Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>, 67141 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: bug#67141: 30.0.50; Missing element in the backtrace
Date: Fri, 17 Nov 2023 16:29:27 -0500

>> It impacts debugging and profiling, in my experience.
> I see, the outcome for me is that we should offer a way for the user to
> force the use of funcall.  Unfortunatelly ATM if one writes like
> (funcall 'eval ...) it gets optimized.  Maybe even a funcall wrapper
> written in Elisp would be sufficient?

FWIW, for the specific example in the bug report, I'd argue that we
should never call `Feval` directly because a call to `eval`
is a pretty strong hint that speed is probably not a priority.
Similarly I'd expect that most calls to `mapcar` won't benefit very much
from a direct call because the cost of preparing the call
(constructing a closure to pass to `mapcar`) and running the loop is
probably high enough to dwarf the function call itself.


        Stefan

Previous Next

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