[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: lists.texi
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: lists.texi |
Date: |
Wed, 22 Jun 2005 21:27:15 +0200 |
> From: Juri Linkov <address@hidden>
> Date: Wed, 22 Jun 2005 19:28:55 +0300
> Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden
>
> > Apparently these timings are not very fixed. In a freshly started
> > Emacs, my proposed version took 12 seconds (instead of earlier 23) and
> > the abstract versions 40 seconds (instead of 51). This gives a
> > mysterious gain of 11 seconds for both. But now my proposed version
> > runs 3.33 times faster than the abstract ones, instead of earlier 2.2.
>
> I noticed too that in sufficiently long Emacs sessions Lisp evaluation
> slows down.
One possible situation where this could happen is if you customize
gc-cons-threshold to a large number.
- Re: lists.texi, (continued)
- Re: lists.texi, Luc Teirlinck, 2005/06/20
- Re: lists.texi, David Kastrup, 2005/06/21
- Re: lists.texi, Richard M. Stallman, 2005/06/21
- Re: lists.texi, Thien-Thi Nguyen, 2005/06/21
- Re: lists.texi, Luc Teirlinck, 2005/06/21
- Re: lists.texi, Thien-Thi Nguyen, 2005/06/21
- Re: lists.texi, Luc Teirlinck, 2005/06/21
- Re: lists.texi, Luc Teirlinck, 2005/06/21
- Re: lists.texi, Thien-Thi Nguyen, 2005/06/21
- Re: lists.texi, Juri Linkov, 2005/06/22
- Re: lists.texi,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- Re: lists.texi, Luc Teirlinck, 2005/06/22
- Re: lists.texi, Luc Teirlinck, 2005/06/22
- Re: lists.texi, Richard M. Stallman, 2005/06/23
- GC (was: lists.texi), Juri Linkov, 2005/06/24
- GC (was: lists.texi), Juri Linkov, 2005/06/24
- Re: GC (was: lists.texi), Eli Zaretskii, 2005/06/24
- Re: GC (was: lists.texi), Juri Linkov, 2005/06/24
- Re: GC (was: lists.texi), Luc Teirlinck, 2005/06/24
- Re: GC (was: lists.texi), Miles Bader, 2005/06/24
- Re: GC (was: lists.texi), Eli Zaretskii, 2005/06/25