Re: Tuple and changes for m68k with -malign-int

On Tue, 20 May 2025, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:

> On Tue, 2025-05-20 at 19:55 +1000, Finn Thain wrote:
> > On Tue, 20 May 2025, John Paul Adrian Glaubitz wrote:
> > 
> > > > As for gccgo, has that ever worked on m68k?
> > > 
> > > Yes.
> > > 
> > 
> > Why is an ABI change needed to get it to work again?
> 
> Because software changes over time. Qt used to work with 2 bytes alignment
> as well when it had less features.
> 
> > > > Other language runtimes work fine on the m68k ABI. Why is Rust 
> > > > special?
> > > 
> > > You mean other languages such as JavaScript, Go, Java, Python and 
> > > WebKit?
> > > 
> > > No, they don't work fine on m68k.
> > > 
> > 
> > Python works -- you patched it yourself! -- it doesn't need a special ABI.
> 
> Yes, I had to PATCH it. That's the point, Finn.
> 

Yes, and then you declined to send your patch upstream, and a Debian 
developer picked up my patch instead.

When I worked on this, I discovered that your patch was inadequate, that 
the problem was not the m68k ABI, and that you threw away a good 
opportunity to improve the upstream project.

I'm not talking about improving the m68k experience, I'm talking about 
improving correctness, re-usability, portability and readability of the 
source code upstream.

https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1087600
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=1105110

> > As for the Java runtime etc. I've never tried to install them on m68k but 
> > I know they were ported to a variety of ABIs with a variety of alignment 
> > rules, that do not guarantee natural alignment of integer types.
> 
> I see. Since you haven't tested it, it means the bug doesn't exist.

No it means I never had a need for those languages on m68k. Does a bug 
exist if no-one executes it? How many actual users are there for the 
Debian/m68k JVM, besides Debian porters?

> 
> Gotcha.
> 

I assumed the bug may exist, but when I asked about it, you evaded the 
question.