A very large big -1 in bold, in caps, if you could type a number in caps. Very much appreciate the idea of this thread, though there are a million things that will be invalidated in existing code all around, not to mention references in communication threads, forum posts etc. A "var HEAP8 = MEM8;" could cause confusion as well, and just increases code size for no runtime benefit - one would have to remember to keep both in track, and invalidate both to let JS engine reclaim. I think this is very much in the bikeshedding territory.
to 17. lokak. 2019 klo 18.27 Gabriel Cuvillier ([email protected]) kirjoitti: > > Hey, I definitively thought you'd say the opposite due to the various issues > you had with unexpected changes. Well, just joking ;) > > I admit I have the same issue than you: my projects often breaks on new > releases of Emscripten. I have to tweak the Doom 3 port regularly (well on > this project this is just for the fun. But I agree that for customers > projects, moving on new versions of Emscripten is a bit more worrying). But I > understand these recent breaking changes were done for good causes: the new > LLVM backend, Asyncify, updates toward WASI compatibility, and so on... as > so, due to the long-term benefits of these new functionalities, I am happy > with all that progress even at the price of short-term issues > > Cheers, > > Le 17/10/2019 à 17:13, Beuc a écrit : > > While I regularly complain about unexpected/undocumented change, I think > Alon's plan is pretty careful and reasonable. > > Badly named variables are a perpetual mental hassle, and triggering a clear > error message means the change won't be obscure. > > Cheers! > Beuc > > On 17/10/2019 17:02, Gabriel Cuvillier wrote: > > 100% agree with Floh there. Changing such a thing is an open door to a > very obscure, hard to find, and unwanted potential "project breaker", for a > very minor added value... > > Having to live with some minor technical debt due to badly named things is > acceptable I suppose. > > > Le 17/10/2019 à 16:51, Floh a écrit : >> >> Isn't there at lot code out there in the wild that would be broken by >> such as change? >> > Yeah. TBH I'm not a fan of a name change even if the new name is slightly > more fitting. That's one of those obscure things that suddenly breaks > projects, usually at the worst possible time (even with a deprecation note > and period, this stuff is usually ignored). If such a change would come with > a real benefit (such as better performance, or less code maintenance in the > future) I'd be all for it, but not when it's just one of the many "badly > named things" in computing :) > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "emscripten-discuss" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/emscripten-discuss/10c8a820-5a3a-d1a6-dec2-6694dd9631ea%40beuc.net. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "emscripten-discuss" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to [email protected]. > To view this discussion on the web visit > https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/emscripten-discuss/4084a0ed-cc59-55c3-83e6-46660e2d1795%40gmail.com. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "emscripten-discuss" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/emscripten-discuss/CA%2B6sJ-03CsHvA3yR6ZsT9LRqk%2BS%2BXQW8n7ik-vseYQwjAOEL6Q%40mail.gmail.com.
