Re: Building Emacs overflowed pure space

[David Kastrup]

Richard Stallman <address@hidden> writes:

>     But to follow your suggestion, why don't we just have _one_ generic
>     uninterned "tmp" symbol for all such uses.
>
> We could do that.  It would work.
>
> It would be a little better to have a list of ten of them and pick at
> random.  That would facilitate examining values in the Lisp debugger
> on those occasions when you really want to.

I don't see how.  They are uninterned, after all.  And "picking at
random" means that it becomes unpredictable what loop combinations
will happen to be debuggable, and what combinations will not.  And it
will change from compilation to compilation.  I don't like that at
all.

Frankly speaking: I don't know what we are supposed to buy ourselves
if a loop body can access its internal variable by (symbol-value
tmp-loop-var) instead of just tmp-loop-var.

It seems like a pointless exercise in obfuscation.  It does not buy us
any encapsulation, and makes debugging and understanding the code
harder when disassembling it.

-- 
David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum