[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#67141: 30.0.50; Missing element in the backtrace
From: |
Stefan Monnier |
Subject: |
bug#67141: 30.0.50; Missing element in the backtrace |
Date: |
Fri, 17 Nov 2023 16:29:27 -0500 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) |
>> It impacts debugging and profiling, in my experience.
> I see, the outcome for me is that we should offer a way for the user to
> force the use of funcall. Unfortunatelly ATM if one writes like
> (funcall 'eval ...) it gets optimized. Maybe even a funcall wrapper
> written in Elisp would be sufficient?
FWIW, for the specific example in the bug report, I'd argue that we
should never call `Feval` directly because a call to `eval`
is a pretty strong hint that speed is probably not a priority.
Similarly I'd expect that most calls to `mapcar` won't benefit very much
from a direct call because the cost of preparing the call
(constructing a closure to pass to `mapcar`) and running the loop is
probably high enough to dwarf the function call itself.
Stefan
- bug#67141: 30.0.50; Missing element in the backtrace, Stefan Monnier, 2023/11/12
- bug#67141: 30.0.50; Missing element in the backtrace, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/11/13
- bug#67141: 30.0.50; Missing element in the backtrace, Andrea Corallo, 2023/11/13
- bug#67141: 30.0.50; Missing element in the backtrace, Andrea Corallo, 2023/11/16
- bug#67141: 30.0.50; Missing element in the backtrace, Stefan Monnier, 2023/11/17
- bug#67141: 30.0.50; Missing element in the backtrace, Andrea Corallo, 2023/11/17
- bug#67141: 30.0.50; Missing element in the backtrace,
Stefan Monnier <=
- bug#67141: 30.0.50; Missing element in the backtrace, Andrea Corallo, 2023/11/20
- bug#67141: 30.0.50; Missing element in the backtrace, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/11/20
- bug#67141: 30.0.50; Missing element in the backtrace, Stefan Monnier, 2023/11/20
- bug#67141: 30.0.50; Missing element in the backtrace, Andrea Corallo, 2023/11/20
- bug#67141: 30.0.50; Missing element in the backtrace, Stefan Monnier, 2023/11/20
- bug#67141: 30.0.50; Missing element in the backtrace, Andrea Corallo, 2023/11/20
- bug#67141: 30.0.50; Missing element in the backtrace, Stefan Monnier, 2023/11/20
bug#67141: 30.0.50; Missing element in the backtrace, Mattias EngdegÄrd, 2023/11/20