[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp
From: |
Emanuel Berg |
Subject: |
Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp |
Date: |
Sat, 18 Feb 2023 21:47:16 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) |
Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>> How can I natively compile _all_ Elisp, my own from the
>> Makefile when byte-compiling, and all other Elisp just once
>> and for all since I don't change that? (By all means, the
>> after change-thing don't have to be disabled or anything as
>> those method are not contradictory, on the ... contrary.)
>
> You could look at how this is done when Emacs is built from the
> release tarball, and do something similar.
Good idea.
> But if you think you can do that only once, you are
> mistaken: basically, each time you want your Lisp to work
> with a new version of Emacs, you need to recompile your Lisp
> into *.eln files anew.
... and when I get a new computer as well?
--
underground experts united
https://dataswamp.org/~incal
- Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp, (continued)
- Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp, Chen Zhaoyang, 2023/02/15
- full native compile (was: Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp), Emanuel Berg, 2023/02/15
- Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp, Jean Louis, 2023/02/16
- Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp, Emanuel Berg, 2023/02/16
- Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp, Jean Louis, 2023/02/17
- Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp, Emanuel Berg, 2023/02/18
- Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp, Emanuel Berg, 2023/02/18
- Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/02/18
- Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp,
Emanuel Berg <=
- Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/02/19
- Native compilation by default?: Was [Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp, Madhu, 2023/02/21
- Re: Native compilation by default?: Was [Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/02/21
- Re: Native compilation by default?: Was [Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp, Emanuel Berg, 2023/02/21
- Re: Native compilation by default?: Was [Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp, Emanuel Berg, 2023/02/21
- Re: Native compilation by default? (was: Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp), Emanuel Berg, 2023/02/21
- Re: Native compilation by default? (was: Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp), Emanuel Berg, 2023/02/21
- Message not available
- Re: Native compilation by default? (was: Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp), Emanuel Berg, 2023/02/21
- Re: Native compilation by default? (was: Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp), Emanuel Berg, 2023/02/23
- Re: Native compilation by default? (was: Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp), Jean Louis, 2023/02/23