[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: PURESIZE increased (again)

From: Ken Raeburn
Subject: Re: PURESIZE increased (again)
Date: Thu, 27 Apr 2006 18:29:31 -0400

On Apr 27, 2006, at 18:12, Luc Teirlinck wrote:
From my previous message:

   Of course, using different compilers or different C Libraries,
_including_ different version numbers for the same compiler or library will not have any effect on the .el file, but it can definitely have
   an effect on the .elc files

On second thought, this seems less immediately obvious, from a purely
"logical" point of view.  But apparently, from the empirical evidence,
differences in compiler, library or OS do seem to matter much more
compiled Lisp files.  Probably, the alignment issues are more complex
for them.

From what I've seen of the Lisp structures and allocation code, I'd be very surprised if this were true. You *may* get different compilers imposing different alignment/padding constraints for structures or unions, but such cases should be very rare and arguably reported as bugs (it'll lead to interoperability problems if they're used on the same system), and I doubt any of the types Emacs Lisp uses get any significant padding. And I don't think there are many data types allocated in loading a .elc file that are not used when loading a .el file.


reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]