Re: Not protecting Lisp objects from GC

[Gerd Möllmann]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> What you are doing is not fixing obvious maintainability bugs which
>> might also show up as real bugs in production. You are writing comments
>> instead. In another branch. And from what I read so far, I get the
>> impression that you are objecting to others making the fixes, in that
>> branch.
>
> Yes, I object to making changes in working code that look unsafe or
> not clean enough, especially in code that we don't understand well and
> for which we have no experts on board.  

This GC issue is well enough understood that one doesn't have to be an
expert to fix it, wherever it is found. It's the simplest of all
possible rules: protect stuff, remove this "cleverness".

> Part of my job, as I see it, is to keep the development version stable
> enough, so any change that might risk destabilizing it without any
> significant benefits gets minuses from me.

I agree with the general direction, but I disagree completely in this
case. And what is worse, Pip is meanwhile pissed off. I'm no longer
reading the mailing lists. Helmut and others can speak for themselves.
Excellent.

Want to know what I think when igc will land: never. It should be given
up as not realizable due to human factors.

>> Not sure what I should think about this.
>
> I hope you will at least give me the benefit of the doubt that I might
> be doing this based on hard-learned experience, even if you do not
> agree with my conclusions.

Of course,  it's nothing personal.