Re: bignum branch

[Andy Moreton]

On Wed 18 Jul 2018, Paul Eggert wrote:

> Stefan Monnier wrote:
>> I recently posted a patch which makes EQ behave like `eql` attached.
>> I just tried to see its impact on the ELisp compilation time
>> (i.e. I did `rm **/*.elc; make`).
>
> I tried to reproduce this on my machine, and ran into some trouble (the code
> had warnings that caused compilation to fail). Although your patch is
> evidently intended only as a quick benchmark and not as an actual change, I
> worry that the benchmark isn't realistic enough, as some usage of EQ in C code
> will need to change to Feql or equivalent. Also, the C code will need to
> change how hashing works since XHASH etc. must be consistent with eq.
>
> Looking into this a bit more, I discovered that eql currently operates
> incorrectly on NaNs, as it's inconsistent with how hash tables work. I
> installed the attached patch into master to fix that.

Your added testcase has:

+;; Test that equality predicates work correctly on NaNs when combined
+;; with hash tables based on those predicates.  This was not the case
+;; for eql in Emacs 26.

Shouldn't something similar be added to NEWS ?

    AndyM