From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Issues for 24.3 Date: Sat, 02 Feb 2013 13:29:28 +0400 Message-ID: <510CDC78.1060503@yandex.ru> References: <87r4kz393n.fsf@yandex.ru> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1359799123 12982 80.91.229.3 (2 Feb 2013 09:58:43 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2013 09:58:43 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Glenn Morris Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Feb 02 10:59:04 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1U1ZsC-0003fw-44 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 02 Feb 2013 10:59:00 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42580 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U1Zrt-00029R-K9 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 02 Feb 2013 04:58:41 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:57749) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U1Zro-000261-Sf for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 02 Feb 2013 04:58:40 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U1ZQI-0003TG-Vk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 02 Feb 2013 04:30:25 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-lb0-f175.google.com ([209.85.217.175]:58383) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U1ZPi-00034s-Tz; Sat, 02 Feb 2013 04:29:35 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-lb0-f175.google.com with SMTP id n3so5228032lbo.20 for ; Sat, 02 Feb 2013 01:29:33 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=x-received:sender:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to :cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=CT/hqOB18BnRhOwfneOWr5SG3cFUh3kB32iN2GJT7dA=; b=qaQoOJTqfmSCffkCfdJYz+jd2u2wwu4I4/HGHc2i9RPoqpH5AeXepfo5v3QSEQtW1p Fpd8RkV18iynV+NJQLGvixcSrMlyVdaqQmmqgVhq+07VYeNOojZMapTjTN3SBPiBH+O5 L4nUZvfadmPeL7mUgm0l6wRFljfZ6C6DeB0R/+HX4dovXFQT/XP8Sp7zf5szUmoU+lYV GfgF5CftKPNgaPDawBhNmsMDFLz25XCK66DpfLBk7nY18xZQ00V4OlrKC0BkqAeuZ4vB OlpUKhqRocCDoRagYyi/FWdZkturo3lA/eEM5MxaLRl567SK1iXakNUTjdVsnSaedpP6 KiIA== X-Received: by 10.112.50.109 with SMTP id b13mr5781475lbo.8.1359797373575; Sat, 02 Feb 2013 01:29:33 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from [127.0.0.1] ([178.252.98.87]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id f2sm3320689lbz.4.2013.02.02.01.29.30 (version=TLSv1 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Sat, 02 Feb 2013 01:29:31 -0800 (PST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130107 Thunderbird/17.0.2 In-Reply-To: X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 209.85.217.175 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:156796 Archived-At: On 02.02.2013 7:15, Glenn Morris wrote: > Dmitry Gutov wrote: > >> Performance regression with uncompiled ruby-mode: >> http://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=13605 > > I don't see how that can be a regression when eager macro expansion does > not exist prior to 24.3. Anyway, the speed of uncompiled code is not > that important. Indeed, sorry, not that kind of regression. Still, though, when uncompiled, the function is 2-3 times slower than the 24.2 version. If you think it's fine, that's okay, just wanted to bring it to attention.