Re: [Horsley Tom <Tom.Horsley@ccur.com>] RE: Bombs loading some XEmacs-compiled .elc's into NTEmacs
>>>> "Jari" == Jari Aalto
<jari.aalto(a)poboxes.com> writes:
Jari> What do you think about adding version information?
Adding version information to the .elc file is an excellent idea.
Using the emacs version number would not be enough, because different
emacsen with the same version number might have incompatible bytecodes.
Jari> From: Horsley Tom <Tom.Horsley(a)ccur.com>
Jari> To: ntemacs-users(a)cs.washington.edu
Jari> Subject: RE: Bombs loading some XEmacs-compiled .elc's into NTEmacs
Jari> Date: Mon, 29 Jan 2001 08:21:24 -0500
Jari> X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
Jari> Sender: owner-ntemacs-users(a)cs.washington.edu
Jari> Precedence: bulk
Jari> X-FAQ: http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/windows/ntemacs.html
Jari> Lines: 11
Jari> Xref: PICASSO list.emacs-nt:4515
> I think that XEmacs implements at least one byte code that is
not
> implemented by GNU Emacs, so GNU Emacs .elc files should run on XEmacs,
> but XEmacs .elc files may not run on GNU Emacs (if they happen to use
> the illegal byte code(s)). So, yes, it's known and expected.
Jari> But what isn't known is why .elc files don't have a version code
Jari> in a header somewhere that says if they use byte codes incompatible
Jari> with interpreters less than version N. You could at least get
Jari> an intelligible error message that way, and might even be able
Jari> to easily scan for incompatible .elc files...
yes.