Received: (at 75359) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Jan 2025 14:59:30 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jan 06 09:59:30 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39592 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tUoZl-000117-VD
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 09:59:30 -0500
Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:48225)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <monnier@HIDDEN>)
id 1tUoZj-00010o-Au
for 75359 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 09:59:28 -0500
Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C9B2A4411A9;
Mon, 6 Jan 2025 09:59:20 -0500 (EST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca;
s=mail; t=1736175559;
bh=QXL4goG/y39wgr2NMb7iXbk6griwYT947TiOLDY4rbk=;
h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From;
b=DYItu7Bunwtw0ZAtC1Gk5yEt6UaQNuYR6ZaB10oAVUgs/LLtP9U/t0TVcbf+bJHcx
lWRAFHzUz5uinNQBDn8m46hHXmZ34gK1YGV9yC1tZmcKFjwYiPOWNQG5QKUkyELgVe
/MwL7M+QSU7AXhYtxKzBECsfAtqRCXXlnvzTnoVgPbPo2Mf+4EslpOwfAaje35FKyR
a59HZfbu6fx3wIfwYaOE3t3QmAWMecmTr0zqp2kRAftlubdewYdUp4q/1aTHjHEAQh
0ABojXDdQpWUn3kuFyrh44XtaDWUO6nBdQv8vyDIVxhW2AlPkiceY9/erQCiF5ARv8
rHhoUYtaCHNHw==
Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1])
by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id CD36A44118D;
Mon, 6 Jan 2025 09:59:19 -0500 (EST)
Received: from pastel (69-165-162-104.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.165.162.104])
by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9D9E2120070;
Mon, 6 Jan 2025 09:59:19 -0500 (EST)
From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
To: Pip Cet <pipcet@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#75359: [scratch/elisp-benchmarks] test dependencies
In-Reply-To: <878qrohucz.fsf@HIDDEN> (Pip Cet's message of "Mon, 06
Jan 2025 14:47:44 +0000")
Message-ID: <jwvv7usngg3.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
References: <878qrqfse2.fsf@HIDDEN> <yp1msg45kuu.fsf@HIDDEN>
<jwvcyh0ow65.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
<878qrohucz.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2025 09:59:19 -0500
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-SPAM-INFO: Spam detection results: 0
ALL_TRUSTED -1 Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP
BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's
domain
DKIM_VALID_EF -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from
domain
X-SPAM-LEVEL:
X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 75359
Cc: "Pip Cet via \"Bug reports for GNU
Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors\"" <bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN>,
Andrea Corallo <acorallo@HIDDEN>, 75359 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---)
> Context: I have extended ERT so it has some minimal benchmarking
> functionality, after investigating (twice) whether elisp-benchmarks.el
> can't be made to do the job. My conclusion was that that would take too
> much time, we should use ERT and ditch elisp-benchmarks.el, modifying
> the benchmarks instead.
I don't have any opinion on that. The `elisp-benchmark.el` code itself
is very small/trivial, so rewriting it should be quite easy.
[ Then again, I can't think of any reason why any of it would take "much
time", whether modifying `elisp-benchmarks.el`, or extending ERT, or
writing it all from scratch. So I'm probably missing something. ]
Stefan
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#75359; Package emacs.
Full text available.
Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Jan 2025 14:59:39 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jan 06 09:59:39 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:39596 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tUoZv-00011U-9J
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 09:59:39 -0500
Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:470:142::17]:35518)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <monnier@HIDDEN>)
id 1tUoZt-00011G-C3
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 09:59:37 -0500
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10])
by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <monnier@HIDDEN>)
id 1tUoZn-0007JN-Vu
for bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 09:59:32 -0500
Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50])
by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <monnier@HIDDEN>)
id 1tUoZi-0000Zv-Ey; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 09:59:30 -0500
Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id C9B2A4411A9;
Mon, 6 Jan 2025 09:59:20 -0500 (EST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca;
s=mail; t=1736175559;
bh=QXL4goG/y39wgr2NMb7iXbk6griwYT947TiOLDY4rbk=;
h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From;
b=DYItu7Bunwtw0ZAtC1Gk5yEt6UaQNuYR6ZaB10oAVUgs/LLtP9U/t0TVcbf+bJHcx
lWRAFHzUz5uinNQBDn8m46hHXmZ34gK1YGV9yC1tZmcKFjwYiPOWNQG5QKUkyELgVe
/MwL7M+QSU7AXhYtxKzBECsfAtqRCXXlnvzTnoVgPbPo2Mf+4EslpOwfAaje35FKyR
a59HZfbu6fx3wIfwYaOE3t3QmAWMecmTr0zqp2kRAftlubdewYdUp4q/1aTHjHEAQh
0ABojXDdQpWUn3kuFyrh44XtaDWUO6nBdQv8vyDIVxhW2AlPkiceY9/erQCiF5ARv8
rHhoUYtaCHNHw==
Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1])
by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id CD36A44118D;
Mon, 6 Jan 2025 09:59:19 -0500 (EST)
Received: from pastel (69-165-162-104.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.165.162.104])
by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 9D9E2120070;
Mon, 6 Jan 2025 09:59:19 -0500 (EST)
From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
To: Pip Cet <pipcet@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#75359: [scratch/elisp-benchmarks] test dependencies
In-Reply-To: <878qrohucz.fsf@HIDDEN> (Pip Cet's message of "Mon, 06
Jan 2025 14:47:44 +0000")
Message-ID: <jwvv7usngg3.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
References: <878qrqfse2.fsf@HIDDEN> <yp1msg45kuu.fsf@HIDDEN>
<jwvcyh0ow65.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
<878qrohucz.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2025 09:59:19 -0500
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-SPAM-INFO: Spam detection results: 0
ALL_TRUSTED -1 Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP
BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's
domain
DKIM_VALID_EF -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from
domain
X-SPAM-LEVEL:
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50;
envelope-from=monnier@HIDDEN; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca
X-Spam_score_int: -42
X-Spam_score: -4.3
X-Spam_bar: ----
X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1,
DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3,
RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001,
SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
X-Spam_action: no action
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit
Cc: "Pip Cet via \"Bug reports for GNU
Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors\"" <bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN>,
Andrea Corallo <acorallo@HIDDEN>, 75359 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
> Context: I have extended ERT so it has some minimal benchmarking
> functionality, after investigating (twice) whether elisp-benchmarks.el
> can't be made to do the job. My conclusion was that that would take too
> much time, we should use ERT and ditch elisp-benchmarks.el, modifying
> the benchmarks instead.
I don't have any opinion on that. The `elisp-benchmark.el` code itself
is very small/trivial, so rewriting it should be quite easy.
[ Then again, I can't think of any reason why any of it would take "much
time", whether modifying `elisp-benchmarks.el`, or extending ERT, or
writing it all from scratch. So I'm probably missing something. ]
Stefan
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#75359; Package emacs.
Full text available.Received: (at 75359) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Jan 2025 14:48:02 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jan 06 09:48:02 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37495 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tUoOf-0008JR-QL for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 09:48:02 -0500 Received: from mail-40134.protonmail.ch ([185.70.40.134]:42911) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <pipcet@HIDDEN>) id 1tUoOb-0008In-NU for 75359 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 09:47:59 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail3; t=1736174870; x=1736434070; bh=kNb9z0buGw0IyqS0NQt5Q+1uolCtMtDwPcySXMrobAQ=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID: Message-ID:BIMI-Selector:List-Unsubscribe:List-Unsubscribe-Post; b=Yq6l9FB0F/xhrcWn2ilGJ3eoBDZrcGRwY7BwYBKjqNh/G49yn+6eGBRPifto/24OJ rIlPjxTQ6SvqIOYIYyAG4H6UqSlHXItpEl8P0let1xH83ZKSyxdAfOjr26CwMcd5V2 UvaNDpnNJoSvmpqu7fKu1eGAFk+D2nBjoMuEoHGHbmZ3aCXDoluKgbSINFQp2QwIhy Fkmgf8Rnyh0eQuSTrvdNjpDS6aqs4zy3vMGJD06kt2o6ddxl+s0kFcGnWexElCjtJA mGwbqk0gHq2yPzmyi9LWayYMJOX88fni6kJcYnFJlsY8RIinFXXv8wrsKMLrrI901Q kWbqaJxvwebmw== Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2025 14:47:44 +0000 To: Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN> From: Pip Cet <pipcet@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#75359: [scratch/elisp-benchmarks] test dependencies Message-ID: <878qrohucz.fsf@HIDDEN> In-Reply-To: <jwvcyh0ow65.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN> References: <878qrqfse2.fsf@HIDDEN> <yp1msg45kuu.fsf@HIDDEN> <jwvcyh0ow65.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN> Feedback-ID: 112775352:user:proton X-Pm-Message-ID: 116801a752e0cb0ed89e4a1c9c5fcad85ba5403f MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 75359 Cc: "Pip Cet via \"Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors\"" <bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN>, Andrea Corallo <acorallo@HIDDEN>, 75359 <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) "Stefan Monnier" <monnier@HIDDEN> writes: > This said, merging `elb-smie.el` and `elb-scroll.el` would be fine. > Can't remember why I didn't do that from the start. Did that on my branch :-) > [ Not sure what ERT has to do with it, BTW. ] See the "make benchmark" discussion, if you really want to :-) Context: I have extended ERT so it has some minimal benchmarking functionality, after investigating (twice) whether elisp-benchmarks.el can't be made to do the job. My conclusion was that that would take too much time, we should use ERT and ditch elisp-benchmarks.el, modifying the benchmarks instead. Andrea asked for bug reports, I provided some, but my opinion is that spending further time on elisp-benchmarks.el isn't productive, so I won't. Pip
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#75359; Package emacs.
Full text available.Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Jan 2025 14:48:10 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jan 06 09:48:10 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37499 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tUoOo-0008Jp-Ba for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 09:48:10 -0500 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:470:142::17]:47844) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <pipcet@HIDDEN>) id 1tUoOm-0008J0-Eo for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 09:48:09 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <pipcet@HIDDEN>) id 1tUoOc-000565-18 for bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 09:47:58 -0500 Received: from mail-40133.protonmail.ch ([185.70.40.133]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <pipcet@HIDDEN>) id 1tUoOY-0007F1-M0 for bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 09:47:57 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail3; t=1736174870; x=1736434070; bh=kNb9z0buGw0IyqS0NQt5Q+1uolCtMtDwPcySXMrobAQ=; h=Date:To:From:Cc:Subject:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:References: Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date:Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID: Message-ID:BIMI-Selector:List-Unsubscribe:List-Unsubscribe-Post; b=Yq6l9FB0F/xhrcWn2ilGJ3eoBDZrcGRwY7BwYBKjqNh/G49yn+6eGBRPifto/24OJ rIlPjxTQ6SvqIOYIYyAG4H6UqSlHXItpEl8P0let1xH83ZKSyxdAfOjr26CwMcd5V2 UvaNDpnNJoSvmpqu7fKu1eGAFk+D2nBjoMuEoHGHbmZ3aCXDoluKgbSINFQp2QwIhy Fkmgf8Rnyh0eQuSTrvdNjpDS6aqs4zy3vMGJD06kt2o6ddxl+s0kFcGnWexElCjtJA mGwbqk0gHq2yPzmyi9LWayYMJOX88fni6kJcYnFJlsY8RIinFXXv8wrsKMLrrI901Q kWbqaJxvwebmw== Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2025 14:47:44 +0000 To: Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN> From: Pip Cet <pipcet@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#75359: [scratch/elisp-benchmarks] test dependencies Message-ID: <878qrohucz.fsf@HIDDEN> In-Reply-To: <jwvcyh0ow65.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN> References: <878qrqfse2.fsf@HIDDEN> <yp1msg45kuu.fsf@HIDDEN> <jwvcyh0ow65.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN> Feedback-ID: 112775352:user:proton X-Pm-Message-ID: 116801a752e0cb0ed89e4a1c9c5fcad85ba5403f MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.70.40.133; envelope-from=pipcet@HIDDEN; helo=mail-40133.protonmail.ch X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit Cc: "Pip Cet via \"Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors\"" <bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN>, Andrea Corallo <acorallo@HIDDEN>, 75359 <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) "Stefan Monnier" <monnier@HIDDEN> writes: > This said, merging `elb-smie.el` and `elb-scroll.el` would be fine. > Can't remember why I didn't do that from the start. Did that on my branch :-) > [ Not sure what ERT has to do with it, BTW. ] See the "make benchmark" discussion, if you really want to :-) Context: I have extended ERT so it has some minimal benchmarking functionality, after investigating (twice) whether elisp-benchmarks.el can't be made to do the job. My conclusion was that that would take too much time, we should use ERT and ditch elisp-benchmarks.el, modifying the benchmarks instead. Andrea asked for bug reports, I provided some, but my opinion is that spending further time on elisp-benchmarks.el isn't productive, so I won't. Pip
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#75359; Package emacs.
Full text available.
Received: (at 75359) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Jan 2025 14:35:51 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jan 06 09:35:51 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37465 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tUoCs-0007jM-Nr
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 09:35:51 -0500
Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:40493)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <monnier@HIDDEN>)
id 1tUoCq-0007j5-5a
for 75359 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 09:35:49 -0500
Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 608E44410E5;
Mon, 6 Jan 2025 09:35:42 -0500 (EST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca;
s=mail; t=1736174141;
bh=V7RdlGDlA+L9ZUI5JbZXx393Mu92bYN7VDRWGUljfB4=;
h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From;
b=DRwZrS5ihhQiSDsI52DavIugFZwQPwZbGIVk1/RdYCf5mOD+fUEGS0P9qB5w5TLQ8
NVVuqvNCudQcgOUqnEQHa6guNmeNh95L14b4lgVroMDruf7LvetzhnIiL39GMsLUnv
PGjQmF5oh4KyfojPG4Y5TTATeVzb/U9jrlAcaups14/nDCs0S+++51LN/z1VfPkNx0
GoVIxmRuKRngWQyaAH3vgUjTvhBMVE/DSEEeaeAG5Oo75nIRhT0X7FOMai0uAxTYZu
EcInICmpzyu85r+6v3uJ5zCGNVK2NQv/okthPHbm859OvKcT9BPrFs8+VjK00vNbTN
NhUdeqcdlg98A==
Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1])
by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2244D441090;
Mon, 6 Jan 2025 09:35:41 -0500 (EST)
Received: from pastel (69-165-162-104.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.165.162.104])
by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E661312022C;
Mon, 6 Jan 2025 09:35:40 -0500 (EST)
From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
To: Andrea Corallo <acorallo@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#75359: [scratch/elisp-benchmarks] test dependencies
In-Reply-To: <yp1msg45kuu.fsf@HIDDEN> (Andrea Corallo's message of
"Mon, 06 Jan 2025 04:53:45 -0500")
Message-ID: <jwvcyh0ow65.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
References: <878qrqfse2.fsf@HIDDEN> <yp1msg45kuu.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2025 09:35:40 -0500
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-SPAM-INFO: Spam detection results: 0
ALL_TRUSTED -1 Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP
BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's
domain
DKIM_VALID_EF -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from
domain
X-SPAM-LEVEL:
X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 75359
Cc: Pip Cet <pipcet@HIDDEN>, "Pip Cet via Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
the Swiss army knife of text
editors" <bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN>, 75359 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---)
>> There are dependencies between emacs-lisp-benchmarks tests, meaning we
>> can't always modify one test without affecting others. The ones I'm
>> aware of are:
>>
>> - elb-bytecomp.el uses elb-smie.el as compilation input (in this
>> context, elb-smie.el is a "resource", not source code). If we
>> modify elb-smie.el, elb-bytecomp.el results will change and become
>> uncomparable.
>
> Shouldn't we just copy of elb-smie.el to resources?
If so, we could just as well use some other file. I used `elb-smie.el`
because it was a large enough file and it was already part of
`elisp-benchmarks`.
>> - elb-scroll.el uses elb-smie.el as a prerequisite. If we modify
>> elb-smie.el, elb-scroll.el results will change and become
>> uncomparable. Furthermore, elb-scroll.el relies on elb-smie.el
>> being compiled in the appropriate fashion by some external
>> mechanism. (I think the best solution here is to merge elb-smie.el
>> and elb-scroll.el into a single file declaring several tests, using
>> the established ERT test framework)
>
> I'm not sure these are real/serious bugs, different versions of
> elisp-benchmarks don't guarantee to give comparable results (like every
> benchmark).
Agreed.
This said, merging `elb-smie.el` and `elb-scroll.el` would be fine.
Can't remember why I didn't do that from the start.
[ Not sure what ERT has to do with it, BTW. ]
>> - bubble.el and bubble-no-cons.el both "provide" the same feature.
>> I'm not sure whether this causes any acute problems, but it
>> demonstrates that the inconsistent use of (provide) in the
>> benchmarks is problematic. If we ever load tests using Frequire, we
>> will load the wrong files. If we don't, provide shouldn't be
>> necessary.
>
> AFAIU the provide is not used by elisp-benchmarks, anyway the typo is
> now fixed.
FWIW, these two files date back to the time where the benchmarks were
defined by their file (i.e. one file per benchmark), whereas nowadays
the benchmarks are defined by the `elb-*-entry` functions, so we should
probably merge those two files into one.
>> - xmenu.c is used as a resource; this is fine. But we must make sure
>> we never copy the "current" xmenu.c to the benchmarks directory
>> without clearly indicating that the benchmark results will become
>> uncomparable.
> Again, changes to the benchmark pertubating results should be tagged as
> a new version, so will be fine to update xmenu.c if necessary as long as
> we update elisp-benchmarks version.
Also I can't think of any reason why we'd want to "update" that file.
At least not until its use of the C language is considered too
antiquated/deprecated.
Stefan
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#75359; Package emacs.
Full text available.
Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Jan 2025 14:35:59 +0000
From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jan 06 09:35:59 2025
Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:37469 helo=debbugs.gnu.org)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2)
(envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>)
id 1tUoD0-0007jj-68
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 09:35:58 -0500
Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:470:142::17]:47372)
by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <monnier@HIDDEN>)
id 1tUoCx-0007jK-Gq
for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 09:35:56 -0500
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10])
by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <monnier@HIDDEN>)
id 1tUoCs-0002Nu-1V
for bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 09:35:50 -0500
Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50])
by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256)
(Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <monnier@HIDDEN>)
id 1tUoCn-0004Gu-Gf; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 09:35:47 -0500
Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1])
by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 608E44410E5;
Mon, 6 Jan 2025 09:35:42 -0500 (EST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca;
s=mail; t=1736174141;
bh=V7RdlGDlA+L9ZUI5JbZXx393Mu92bYN7VDRWGUljfB4=;
h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From;
b=DRwZrS5ihhQiSDsI52DavIugFZwQPwZbGIVk1/RdYCf5mOD+fUEGS0P9qB5w5TLQ8
NVVuqvNCudQcgOUqnEQHa6guNmeNh95L14b4lgVroMDruf7LvetzhnIiL39GMsLUnv
PGjQmF5oh4KyfojPG4Y5TTATeVzb/U9jrlAcaups14/nDCs0S+++51LN/z1VfPkNx0
GoVIxmRuKRngWQyaAH3vgUjTvhBMVE/DSEEeaeAG5Oo75nIRhT0X7FOMai0uAxTYZu
EcInICmpzyu85r+6v3uJ5zCGNVK2NQv/okthPHbm859OvKcT9BPrFs8+VjK00vNbTN
NhUdeqcdlg98A==
Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1])
by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2244D441090;
Mon, 6 Jan 2025 09:35:41 -0500 (EST)
Received: from pastel (69-165-162-104.dsl.teksavvy.com [69.165.162.104])
by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E661312022C;
Mon, 6 Jan 2025 09:35:40 -0500 (EST)
From: Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN>
To: Andrea Corallo <acorallo@HIDDEN>
Subject: Re: bug#75359: [scratch/elisp-benchmarks] test dependencies
In-Reply-To: <yp1msg45kuu.fsf@HIDDEN> (Andrea Corallo's message of
"Mon, 06 Jan 2025 04:53:45 -0500")
Message-ID: <jwvcyh0ow65.fsf-monnier+emacs@HIDDEN>
References: <878qrqfse2.fsf@HIDDEN> <yp1msg45kuu.fsf@HIDDEN>
Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2025 09:35:40 -0500
User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
X-SPAM-INFO: Spam detection results: 0
ALL_TRUSTED -1 Passed through trusted hosts only via SMTP
BAYES_00 -1.9 Bayes spam probability is 0 to 1%
DKIM_SIGNED 0.1 Message has a DKIM or DK signature,
not necessarily valid
DKIM_VALID -0.1 Message has at least one valid DKIM or DK signature
DKIM_VALID_AU -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from author's
domain
DKIM_VALID_EF -0.1 Message has a valid DKIM or DK signature from envelope-from
domain
X-SPAM-LEVEL:
Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50;
envelope-from=monnier@HIDDEN; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca
X-Spam_score_int: -42
X-Spam_score: -4.3
X-Spam_bar: ----
X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1,
DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3,
RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001,
SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
X-Spam_action: no action
X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/)
X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit
Cc: Pip Cet <pipcet@HIDDEN>, "Pip Cet via Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
the Swiss army knife of text
editors" <bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN>, 75359 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18
Precedence: list
List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/>
List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>,
<mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>
X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-)
>> There are dependencies between emacs-lisp-benchmarks tests, meaning we
>> can't always modify one test without affecting others. The ones I'm
>> aware of are:
>>
>> - elb-bytecomp.el uses elb-smie.el as compilation input (in this
>> context, elb-smie.el is a "resource", not source code). If we
>> modify elb-smie.el, elb-bytecomp.el results will change and become
>> uncomparable.
>
> Shouldn't we just copy of elb-smie.el to resources?
If so, we could just as well use some other file. I used `elb-smie.el`
because it was a large enough file and it was already part of
`elisp-benchmarks`.
>> - elb-scroll.el uses elb-smie.el as a prerequisite. If we modify
>> elb-smie.el, elb-scroll.el results will change and become
>> uncomparable. Furthermore, elb-scroll.el relies on elb-smie.el
>> being compiled in the appropriate fashion by some external
>> mechanism. (I think the best solution here is to merge elb-smie.el
>> and elb-scroll.el into a single file declaring several tests, using
>> the established ERT test framework)
>
> I'm not sure these are real/serious bugs, different versions of
> elisp-benchmarks don't guarantee to give comparable results (like every
> benchmark).
Agreed.
This said, merging `elb-smie.el` and `elb-scroll.el` would be fine.
Can't remember why I didn't do that from the start.
[ Not sure what ERT has to do with it, BTW. ]
>> - bubble.el and bubble-no-cons.el both "provide" the same feature.
>> I'm not sure whether this causes any acute problems, but it
>> demonstrates that the inconsistent use of (provide) in the
>> benchmarks is problematic. If we ever load tests using Frequire, we
>> will load the wrong files. If we don't, provide shouldn't be
>> necessary.
>
> AFAIU the provide is not used by elisp-benchmarks, anyway the typo is
> now fixed.
FWIW, these two files date back to the time where the benchmarks were
defined by their file (i.e. one file per benchmark), whereas nowadays
the benchmarks are defined by the `elb-*-entry` functions, so we should
probably merge those two files into one.
>> - xmenu.c is used as a resource; this is fine. But we must make sure
>> we never copy the "current" xmenu.c to the benchmarks directory
>> without clearly indicating that the benchmark results will become
>> uncomparable.
> Again, changes to the benchmark pertubating results should be tagged as
> a new version, so will be fine to update xmenu.c if necessary as long as
> we update elisp-benchmarks version.
Also I can't think of any reason why we'd want to "update" that file.
At least not until its use of the C language is considered too
antiquated/deprecated.
Stefan
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#75359; Package emacs.
Full text available.Received: (at 75359) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Jan 2025 09:53:55 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jan 06 04:53:55 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36737 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tUjo3-0001US-Bk for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 04:53:55 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:49028) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <acorallo@HIDDEN>) id 1tUjo0-0001Tx-1a for 75359 <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 04:53:53 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <acorallo@HIDDEN>) id 1tUjnt-0003bW-IX; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 04:53:45 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To: From; bh=xm/SfYf4rmCcIvn2UzypXP3KH8H+K4+F6skIK2Og7Kc=; b=bxLgGjOQUfDbkmgFkSb3 yFIcn+vwdQ6WDo1NAGmHkdi1NYiuB91iMsIbvA/75Mo/GHBYw7pMQSClo0LsNKxQrm+XMU5RC3btU 1YQQnxKOy2t93a6wxULLznBODzy23yRVWZGk9IfzpCpRzd7YmEPuiwWTplVH4ipPRCPyVmesJLCTe Up7TXp7kxsuxcc+M9GmCsPk5QaHT1BrOnWnp32/XqwF8/kIloivNM5iMCHvmNI1/Ex7aFqoWttEBB Bv+RGO8p7ofFFX8zwLP/QxOzywBe80iIxw+xvQQHnFtI4tN3BnaX61abB7TtMGmFD2/rOZAuAWV0t +6iynux3OU/55g==; Received: from acorallo by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <acorallo@HIDDEN>) id 1tUjnt-0006bp-9z; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 04:53:45 -0500 From: Andrea Corallo <acorallo@HIDDEN> To: Pip Cet via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#75359: [scratch/elisp-benchmarks] test dependencies In-Reply-To: <878qrqfse2.fsf@HIDDEN> (Pip Cet via's message of "Sat, 04 Jan 2025 16:37:26 +0000") References: <878qrqfse2.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2025 04:53:45 -0500 Message-ID: <yp1msg45kuu.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 75359 Cc: 75359 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Pip Cet <pipcet@HIDDEN>, Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) Pip Cet via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN> writes: > There are dependencies between emacs-lisp-benchmarks tests, meaning we > can't always modify one test without affecting others. The ones I'm > aware of are: > > - elb-bytecomp.el uses elb-smie.el as compilation input (in this > context, elb-smie.el is a "resource", not source code). If we > modify elb-smie.el, elb-bytecomp.el results will change and become > uncomparable. Shouldn't we just copy of elb-smie.el to resources? > - elb-scroll.el uses elb-smie.el as a prerequisite. If we modify > elb-smie.el, elb-scroll.el results will change and become > uncomparable. Furthermore, elb-scroll.el relies on elb-smie.el > being compiled in the appropriate fashion by some external > mechanism. (I think the best solution here is to merge elb-smie.el > and elb-scroll.el into a single file declaring several tests, using > the established ERT test framework) I'm not sure these are real/serious bugs, different versions of elisp-benchmarks don't guarantee to give comparable results (like every benchmark). Anyway adding Stefan who added this code. > - bubble.el and bubble-no-cons.el both "provide" the same feature. > I'm not sure whether this causes any acute problems, but it > demonstrates that the inconsistent use of (provide) in the > benchmarks is problematic. If we ever load tests using Frequire, we > will load the wrong files. If we don't, provide shouldn't be > necessary. AFAIU the provide is not used by elisp-benchmarks, anyway the typo is now fixed. > - xmenu.c is used as a resource; this is fine. But we must make sure > we never copy the "current" xmenu.c to the benchmarks directory > without clearly indicating that the benchmark results will become > uncomparable. Again, changes to the benchmark pertubating results should be tagged as a new version, so will be fine to update xmenu.c if necessary as long as we update elisp-benchmarks version.
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#75359; Package emacs.
Full text available.Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Jan 2025 09:53:55 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jan 06 04:53:55 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36735 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tUjo2-0001UP-UK for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 04:53:55 -0500 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:470:142::17]:51724) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <acorallo@HIDDEN>) id 1tUjo0-0001U0-Pp for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 04:53:53 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <acorallo@HIDDEN>) id 1tUjnv-0004BM-0j for bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 04:53:47 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <acorallo@HIDDEN>) id 1tUjnt-0003bW-IX; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 04:53:45 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To: From; bh=xm/SfYf4rmCcIvn2UzypXP3KH8H+K4+F6skIK2Og7Kc=; b=bxLgGjOQUfDbkmgFkSb3 yFIcn+vwdQ6WDo1NAGmHkdi1NYiuB91iMsIbvA/75Mo/GHBYw7pMQSClo0LsNKxQrm+XMU5RC3btU 1YQQnxKOy2t93a6wxULLznBODzy23yRVWZGk9IfzpCpRzd7YmEPuiwWTplVH4ipPRCPyVmesJLCTe Up7TXp7kxsuxcc+M9GmCsPk5QaHT1BrOnWnp32/XqwF8/kIloivNM5iMCHvmNI1/Ex7aFqoWttEBB Bv+RGO8p7ofFFX8zwLP/QxOzywBe80iIxw+xvQQHnFtI4tN3BnaX61abB7TtMGmFD2/rOZAuAWV0t +6iynux3OU/55g==; Received: from acorallo by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <acorallo@HIDDEN>) id 1tUjnt-0006bp-9z; Mon, 06 Jan 2025 04:53:45 -0500 From: Andrea Corallo <acorallo@HIDDEN> To: Pip Cet via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN> Subject: Re: bug#75359: [scratch/elisp-benchmarks] test dependencies In-Reply-To: <878qrqfse2.fsf@HIDDEN> (Pip Cet via's message of "Sat, 04 Jan 2025 16:37:26 +0000") References: <878qrqfse2.fsf@HIDDEN> Date: Mon, 06 Jan 2025 04:53:45 -0500 Message-ID: <yp1msg45kuu.fsf@HIDDEN> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit Cc: 75359 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, Pip Cet <pipcet@HIDDEN>, Stefan Monnier <monnier@HIDDEN> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -1.0 (-) Pip Cet via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN> writes: > There are dependencies between emacs-lisp-benchmarks tests, meaning we > can't always modify one test without affecting others. The ones I'm > aware of are: > > - elb-bytecomp.el uses elb-smie.el as compilation input (in this > context, elb-smie.el is a "resource", not source code). If we > modify elb-smie.el, elb-bytecomp.el results will change and become > uncomparable. Shouldn't we just copy of elb-smie.el to resources? > - elb-scroll.el uses elb-smie.el as a prerequisite. If we modify > elb-smie.el, elb-scroll.el results will change and become > uncomparable. Furthermore, elb-scroll.el relies on elb-smie.el > being compiled in the appropriate fashion by some external > mechanism. (I think the best solution here is to merge elb-smie.el > and elb-scroll.el into a single file declaring several tests, using > the established ERT test framework) I'm not sure these are real/serious bugs, different versions of elisp-benchmarks don't guarantee to give comparable results (like every benchmark). Anyway adding Stefan who added this code. > - bubble.el and bubble-no-cons.el both "provide" the same feature. > I'm not sure whether this causes any acute problems, but it > demonstrates that the inconsistent use of (provide) in the > benchmarks is problematic. If we ever load tests using Frequire, we > will load the wrong files. If we don't, provide shouldn't be > necessary. AFAIU the provide is not used by elisp-benchmarks, anyway the typo is now fixed. > - xmenu.c is used as a resource; this is fine. But we must make sure > we never copy the "current" xmenu.c to the benchmarks directory > without clearly indicating that the benchmark results will become > uncomparable. Again, changes to the benchmark pertubating results should be tagged as a new version, so will be fine to update xmenu.c if necessary as long as we update elisp-benchmarks version.
bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#75359; Package emacs.
Full text available.Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Jan 2025 16:37:39 +0000 From debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sat Jan 04 11:37:39 2025 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56888 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1tU79e-00014n-Op for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 04 Jan 2025 11:37:39 -0500 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:470:142::17]:44324) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <pipcet@HIDDEN>) id 1tU79d-00014V-Ep for submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 04 Jan 2025 11:37:37 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <pipcet@HIDDEN>) id 1tU79Y-0007IF-5k for bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN; Sat, 04 Jan 2025 11:37:32 -0500 Received: from mail-4322.protonmail.ch ([185.70.43.22]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <pipcet@HIDDEN>) id 1tU79W-0006rA-Hx for bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN; Sat, 04 Jan 2025 11:37:31 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=protonmail.com; s=protonmail3; t=1736008649; x=1736267849; bh=Wn+/jxqZzE68eJuX1j/Evzjn9ThC70XMy0ZTVBon/u4=; h=Date:To:From:Subject:Message-ID:Feedback-ID:From:To:Cc:Date: Subject:Reply-To:Feedback-ID:Message-ID:BIMI-Selector: List-Unsubscribe:List-Unsubscribe-Post; b=KjOqgleK4fGmkB4SKgIURo4kTmQhpetVNKtDoi+LSZHC2V2szw4FNnVQyx5Ds6K60 XXkJ0OXMa338cWJMEoB1bPCL+gPhblOeg+/aVUGfmhmW59mhdabhfEBeeIM/fvszir whu1Lk+Cv4N3zZPahmWgSooecizudVqniu8WXgzR2WlSfi430PKKWXMAmCHBI/6fuR qNoDT37tlKUNRqH9dPRGtwFTdwzn71V2octhltmhmfaXSY/Eu1HjlPspp3HwucSJ1i V2R9oSbPkiZKQbwQb9PuNMwEMMycjJ8EWcVMxoTDFVucCr+aq6pQyK8F4fJjAgd8rh Kyb5MutuIZd5g== Date: Sat, 04 Jan 2025 16:37:26 +0000 To: bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN From: Pip Cet <pipcet@HIDDEN> Subject: [scratch/elisp-benchmarks] test dependencies Message-ID: <878qrqfse2.fsf@HIDDEN> Feedback-ID: 112775352:user:proton X-Pm-Message-ID: 14416cd2b586cb2665e70432c41a079bb2ed8c13 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.70.43.22; envelope-from=pipcet@HIDDEN; helo=mail-4322.protonmail.ch X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_SAFE_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: <debbugs-submit.debbugs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/options/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/private/debbugs-submit/> List-Post: <mailto:debbugs-submit <at> debbugs.gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/debbugs-submit>, <mailto:debbugs-submit-request <at> debbugs.gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces <at> debbugs.gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -0.0 (/) There are dependencies between emacs-lisp-benchmarks tests, meaning we can't always modify one test without affecting others. The ones I'm aware of are: - elb-bytecomp.el uses elb-smie.el as compilation input (in this context, elb-smie.el is a "resource", not source code). If we modify elb-smie.el, elb-bytecomp.el results will change and become uncomparable. - elb-scroll.el uses elb-smie.el as a prerequisite. If we modify elb-smie.el, elb-scroll.el results will change and become uncomparable. Furthermore, elb-scroll.el relies on elb-smie.el being compiled in the appropriate fashion by some external mechanism. (I think the best solution here is to merge elb-smie.el and elb-scroll.el into a single file declaring several tests, using the established ERT test framework) - bubble.el and bubble-no-cons.el both "provide" the same feature. I'm not sure whether this causes any acute problems, but it demonstrates that the inconsistent use of (provide) in the benchmarks is problematic. If we ever load tests using Frequire, we will load the wrong files. If we don't, provide shouldn't be necessary. - xmenu.c is used as a resource; this is fine. But we must make sure we never copy the "current" xmenu.c to the benchmarks directory without clearly indicating that the benchmark results will become uncomparable.
Pip Cet <pipcet@HIDDEN>:bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN.
Full text available.bug-gnu-emacs@HIDDEN:bug#75359; Package emacs.
Full text available.
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.