Re: Patch for fields of `struct buffer'

[Richard Stallman]

    One thing worth noting is that if the concurrency branch is a huge
    failure, it is simple to back out at least the buffer change.

That is true.

      And, since there is no performance penalty
    possible until concurrency is actually merged, I think the risks
    associated with moving forward are rather low.

If the new macros expand into the existing code, they won't cause
a slowdown.  They only make the code less natural.

So why merge the macro calls into the trunk?
You could put them in a branch.  If you ever get preemptive threads
working such that we want to install it, we could install that change then.

    The point of this patch series is to make it simpler to work on the
    other problems on a branch.

That goal seems unobjectionable, but why do you need to change these
calls in the trunk to be able to work on your branch?


-- 
Richard Stallman
President, Free Software Foundation
51 Franklin St
Boston MA 02110
USA
www.fsf.org, www.gnu.org