[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: PURESIZE increased (again)
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: PURESIZE increased (again) |
Date: |
Sat, 29 Apr 2006 18:13:18 +0300 |
> From: Reiner Steib <address@hidden>
> Cc: address@hidden
> Date: Fri, 28 Apr 2006 19:15:53 +0200
>
> On Fri, Apr 28 2006, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>
> > I think it's time to see whether the *.elc files we use are identical.
> > Can you upload a couple of worst offenders, say, files.elc and
> > simple.elc? I'd like to compare them to mine.
>
> http://theotp1.physik.uni-ulm.de/~ste/tmp/emacs/lisp/
>
> (The *.elc files were compile on i686.)
Thanks.
I compared these with the versions compiled on a 32-bit Windows host,
and they seem to be identical, except for 2 aspects:
. Source files, whose absolute file names appear in a comment at the
beginning of the .elc files. These are in comments, so they are
obviously not the reason for the differences in pure space usage.
. Minor differences in the defvar's and custom forms, like these:
-(defvar backup-inhibited nil (#$ . 2763))
+(defvar backup-inhibited nil (#$ . 2801))
-(custom-declare-variable 'backup-by-copying 'nil '(#$ . -3035) :type
'boolean :group 'backup)
+(custom-declare-variable 'backup-by-copying 'nil '(#$ . -3073) :type
'boolean :group 'backup)
I think these differences are immaterial, but just so we don't miss
something of importance: could someone who knows more than myself
about the byte-compiled code please tell what are those numbers that
differ between the two systems?
Meanwhile, I will try to prepare a GDB session that we could use to
compare the pure space allocation during loadup.
Thanks again for working on this.
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), (continued)
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Reiner Steib, 2006/04/27
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Eli Zaretskii, 2006/04/28
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Reiner Steib, 2006/04/28
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Andreas Schwab, 2006/04/28
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Eli Zaretskii, 2006/04/28
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Reiner Steib, 2006/04/28
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again),
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Stefan Monnier, 2006/04/29
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Eli Zaretskii, 2006/04/29
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Andreas Schwab, 2006/04/29
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Luc Teirlinck, 2006/04/21
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Eli Zaretskii, 2006/04/22
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Miles Bader, 2006/04/22
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Eli Zaretskii, 2006/04/22
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Luc Teirlinck, 2006/04/22
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Eli Zaretskii, 2006/04/22
- Re: PURESIZE increased (again), Nick Roberts, 2006/04/22