GNU bug report logs - #79009
[PATCH] Improve 'vtable' object handling, cache handling, messages

Previous Next

Full log

Message #68 received at 79009 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Stéphane Marks <shipmints <at> gmail.com>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
Cc: sbaugh <at> janestreet.com, krisbalintona <at> gmail.com, joostkremers <at> fastmail.fm,
 sbaugh <at> catern.com, 79009 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, visuweshm <at> gmail.com,
 adam <at> alphapapa.net, larsi <at> gnus.org, arstoffel <at> gmail.com, ijqq <at> protonmail.com
Subject: Re: bug#79009: [PATCH] Improve 'vtable' object handling, cache
 handling, messages
Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2025 09:40:34 -0400

[Message part 1 (text/plain, inline)]

On Sat, Aug 16, 2025 at 6:36 AM Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:

> > From: Stéphane Marks <shipmints <at> gmail.com>
> > Date: Sat, 2 Aug 2025 10:22:15 -0400
> > Cc: sbaugh <at> catern.com, sbaugh <at> janestreet.com, krisbalintona <at> gmail.com,
> >       joostkremers <at> fastmail.fm, 79009 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
> visuweshm <at> gmail.com,
> >       adam <at> alphapapa.net, larsi <at> gnus.org, arstoffel <at> gmail.com,
> ijqq <at> protonmail.com
> >
> > On Sat, Aug 2, 2025 at 9:47 AM Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org> wrote:
> >
> >  > Cc: Spencer Baugh <sbaugh <at> janestreet.com>,
> >  >  Kristoffer Balintona <krisbalintona <at> gmail.com>,
> >  >  Joost Kremers <joostkremers <at> fastmail.fm>, 79009 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
> >  >  Visuwesh <visuweshm <at> gmail.com>, Adam Porter <adam <at> alphapapa.net>,
> >  >  Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>, Augusto Stoffel <
> arstoffel <at> gmail.com>,
> >  >  ijqq <at> protonmail.com
> >  > From: sbaugh <at> catern.com
> >  > Date: Wed, 16 Jul 2025 22:02:56 +0000 (UTC)
> >  >
> >  > > My patch is self consistent as far as I can tell.
> >  > >
> >  > > Once we decide on if we leave equal semantics to the caller, for
> example, vtable-goto-object call
> >  site first locating an object on
> >  > > its own, then relying on eq semantics to move point, or allow users
> to define -object-equal, the rest
> >  of my related changes
> >  > > (coming shortly after we conclude this part of the discussion) have
> more cache items repaired, not
> >  just these.
> >  > >
> >  > > We can debate simplifying the cache in a new cache-related patch,
> yes?
> >  >
> >  > Sure.  If we debate it in a new patch, then don't change the cache in
> >  > this patch.  If you want to change the cache in this patch, then we
> have
> >  > to debate it now.
> >
> >  Can we please have an updated patch that we could discuss and perhaps
> >  install?
> >
> > I think the ball is in my court.  I've been on holiday (but obv reading
> email) and will get back to this soon.
>
> Any progress since then?
>

Still traveling. Once I return to "normal" I'll start attacking the vtable
list in digestible chunks with the group.  Don't worry--I won't forget this
project, I spent far too much time fixing vtable bugs and adding missing
features to let this go (plus, I volunteered to be the vtable maintainer,
right?).

[Message part 2 (text/html, inline)]

Previous Next

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