Subject: bug#68244: hash-table improvements

From: Stefan Monnier <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 14 Feb 2024 08:05:12 -0500

>>> With Stefan's suggestion, if I understood it right,
>>> we'd have `obarray-make` return (vector 0).
>> I did not suggest such a thing.
> Sorry, didn't mean to misrepresent. I should have said that it is one way of
> implementing `obarray-make` if compatibility with vector-assuming code
> really is a serious concern.

BTW, my idea adjusted for the kind of compatibility you're after would
have been to define `obarray-make` as (vector (internal-make-real-obarray))

>> I think it's worth introducing a bit of incompatibility, for the benefit
>> of a cleaner API.  Such incompatibility should be very easy to fix while
>> still maintaining compatibility with old Emacsen (at least back to
>> Emacs-25, where the `obarray-make` and `obarrayp` were introduced).
> I'm all for it but those obarray functions weren't mentioned in NEWS at the
> time nor in the manual (which even today recommends, even mandates, use of
> make-vector) so perhaps we need a bridge?

You might be right.  I guess time will tell :-)

        Stefan