Re: Making --with-wide-int the default

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: David Kastrup <address@hidden>
> Cc: Ulrich Mueller <address@hidden>,  address@hidden,  address@hidden,  
> address@hidden,  address@hidden
> Date: Sun, 15 Nov 2015 21:50:27 +0100
> 
> Eli Zaretskii <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> >> Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2015 18:38:37 +0100
> >> From: Ulrich Mueller <address@hidden>
> >> Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden, address@hidden, address@hidden,
> >>    address@hidden
> >> 
> >> In case you want any feedback from distros, Gentoo makes the option
> >> available to users as the "wide-int" use flag, and the default is off.
> >> I've not seen a single complaint from users that we should change that
> >> default. (So most likely the Gentoo default will stay off, regardless
> >> of what you decide to do with the upstream default.)
> >
> > Did the option you offer mention the fact that using it enlarges the
> > maximum buffer and string size to (almost) 2GB?  If not, it's quite
> > possible that your users simply did not realize what this option would
> > give them in user-level functionality, and treated it as yet another
> > obscure build feature.
> >
> > Also, I must say it sounds strange to me that you wait for user
> > complaints before you decide that some option should be on by default.
> 
> A performance hit by 30% and noticeable increase of memory usage are not
> exactly a bargain for being able to load ridiculously large files into
> an editor on a 32-bit system.
> 
> If people had wagonloads of memory to spare, they'd be running 64-bit
> systems in the first place.

How is this related to what I wrote, may I ask?  Ulrich never
mentioned these factors, and I replied to what he wrote.

> I really don't get what the clamor for wide ints on a 32 bit system is
> supposed to be about.  It's rather few people that you are doing an
> actual favor here.  Stuff like GnuTLS or libxml2 or file notifications
> or image support don't bog your system down when you don't use them.
> Wide ints do.

Once again, how is that relevant to what I wrote in my message to
Ulrich?

Look, it's clear that you are against this option.  You made that
clear several times already; repeating it time and again doesn't add
weight to your opinions.  Especially when those opinions are plugged
with no relation whatsoever to what I wrote.