Re: [Emacs-diffs] trunk r117941: Default to stack objects on non-GNU/Linux, non-DOS_NT platforms.

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Thu, 25 Sep 2014 13:51:44 +0400
> From: Dmitry Antipov <address@hidden>
> CC: address@hidden
> 
> On 09/25/2014 12:15 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> 
> > It was done in complete silence, without prior discussions wrt
> > whether to make this the default.  (Yes, I suggested that, but no
> > one replied, and we never discussed it.)
> 
> IMO 1) any discussions whether to make USE_STACK_LISP_OBJECTS the default
> makes no sense until we know whether it's worth the complexities at all.
> For the latter, we need a lot of feedback from users, preferably with
> the very different usage patterns and workloads.  The simplest (and the
> only reliable) method is to enable it by default and see what happens.
> OTOH I'm not against making it opt-out, as you suggested.

I suggested, and no one responded.  Ergo, no discussions.

You get more feedback if you enable the feature on all the platforms
that can support it.  Which is exactly my point.

> > It arbitrarily excludes the native MS-Windows builds from this
> > feature, for no good reasons: the 64-bit Windows build has no
> > problems with it
> 
> IMO 2) responsible developer should not enable any code she/he can't
> test.

You elided the part where I said that Paul could have asked others to
add whatever is necessary for 32-bit Windows.

> If you are rather sure that it should work on 64-bit MS-Windows

We tested that, so yes, I'm sure, as should be anyone else who reads
this list.

> > In general, every feature that exists only on some platforms is a
> > Bad Thing, as it introduces maintenance problems and in particular
> > makes people who work on different platforms unable to usefully
> > compare what they see and solve problems reported by others.
> 
> USE_STACK_LISP_OBJECT is not such a feature.  It's rather under
> construction and not yet populated to all (most?) platforms we aim
> to support.  If you want to help with that, you're always welcome.

You asked help for testing on Windows, and I did just that.  If you
need more help, you need but to ask.

> > In sum, I don't understand these sneaky practices, and I wish they'd
> > stopped.
> 
> Sneaky?  I would call it too brave.

Whatever you call it, it's not how we do things here.  Please don't
follow that bad example, and please don't get fascinated by it.