From xemacs-m  Sun Mar  9 22:30:44 1997
Received: from altair.xemacs.org (steve@xemacs.miranova.com [206.190.83.19])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id WAA14490
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Sun, 9 Mar 1997 22:30:42 -0600 (CST)
Received: (from steve@localhost)
	by altair.xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) id UAA26867;
	Sun, 9 Mar 1997 20:42:50 -0800
Mail-Copies-To: never
To: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
Subject: Re: XEmacs-19.15b98: Success && Problems with glibc 2.0.1+,i486,Linux 2.0.29
References: <m0w3qe6-0001nrC@arthur.pfalz.de>
X-Url: http://www.miranova.com/%7Esteve/
X-Face: #!T9!#9s-3o8)*uHlX{Ug[xW7E7Wr!*L46-OxqMu\xz23v|R9q}lH?cRS{rCNe^'[`^sr5"
 f8*@r4ipO6Jl!:Ccq<xoV[Qz2u8<8-+Vwf2gzJ44lf_/y9OaQ`@#Q65{U4/TC)i2`~/M&QI$X>p:9I
 OSS'2{-)-4wBnVeg0S\O4Al@)uC[pD|+
X-Attribution: sb
From: Steven L Baur <steve@miranova.com>
In-Reply-To: Andreas Jaeger's message of Sun, 9 Mar 1997 23:00:46 +0100 (CET)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.105)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Date: 09 Mar 1997 20:42:49 -0800
Message-ID: <m2zpwcichi.fsf@altair.xemacs.org>
Lines: 38
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.4.25/XEmacs 20.1

Andreas Jaeger writes:

> As with XEmacs 20.1beta6 XEmacs has been rebuild three times. The
> first time I get the following which doesn't look nice (note the
> negative numbers).

 ...
>    all strings:             1978    41896  99%

>    symbol-name strings:     2042    41988  99%
>    byte-code strings:          0        0   0%
>    interactive strings:        0        0   0%
>    documentation strings:      0        0   0%
>    other function strings:     0        0   0%

>    other strings:            -64      -92   0%
 ...
> not-up-to-date lisp-directory. I'm still puzzled by the negative
> numbers in the above output.

The figures on `other strings' are computed not kept.  The totals of
symbol-name/byte-code/interactive/doc/other function strings are added
together and subtracted from `all strings' to arrive at a figure.

1978 - 2042 = -64 and 41896 - 41988 = -92

`other vectors' is computed the same way.

I've noticed them for awhile now and it hasn't appeared to have any
ill effect.  I presume it's a bug in the statistics-keeping code or
it's an effect of having pure objects with partial impurities because
the numbers can be spectacularly negative when the end of pure space
is reached.  This is O.K. in the sense that it is situation where
XEmacs isn't expected to do anything other than finish loading and
exit without dropping core.
-- 
steve@miranova.com baur
Unsolicited commercial e-mail will be billed at $250/message.

