Subject: bug#75521: scratch/igc: Delete unused macro DEFVAR_LISP_NOPROX

From: Pip Cet <[email-masked]>
Date: Wed, 15 Jan 2025 17:52:13 +0000

"Eli Zaretskii" <[email-masked]> writes:

>> From: Stefan Kangas <[email-masked]>
>> Date: Tue, 14 Jan 2025 16:46:06 -0500
>> Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
>>
>> Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]> writes:
>>
>> >> From: Stefan Kangas <[email-masked]>
>> >> Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2025 21:09:02 +0000
>> >> Cc: [email-masked], [email-masked]
>> >>
>> >> Yes, indeed, but that seems like an optimization that is not worth
>> >> doing.  Not these days, at any rate.
>> >
>> > If you try to staticpro too many variables, the build will fail
>> > because Emacs runs out of space in staticvec.  Not everyone knows what
>> > to do in this case, and it's an annoyance when this happens.  So I
>> > would not say so easily that it's an optimization not worth doing, no.
>>
>> NSTATICS was last increased by Paul in 2013 (4195afc389bb).
>
> Actually, it was a year before, but I don't see how that changes the
> fact that redundant protecting should be avoided.

That sentence is the straw that broke the camel's back.

It's not a fact, it's an individual opinion which virtually everyone
else disagrees with (for very good reasons).  I certainly do.  Literally
the only argument that has been advanced to support this *opinion* is
that removing the *three* remaining _NOPROs (which are, at this point,
NOT redundant, but buggy) would somehow cause us to run out of NSTATICS,
which would mean more than doubling our staticpro calls overnight,
adding more than a thousand staticpros.

If diverging opinions are described as contradicting alleged "facts",
there is no point discussing this further.

Pip