From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Paul Eggert Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: list3i etc. Date: Thu, 07 Mar 2013 13:17:30 -0800 Message-ID: <513903EA.1050409@cs.ucla.edu> References: <83boav20hi.fsf@gnu.org> <837glj1ymz.fsf@gnu.org> <513856A1.1050408@yandex.ru> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1362691061 17078 80.91.229.3 (7 Mar 2013 21:17:41 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 7 Mar 2013 21:17:41 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Dmitry Antipov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Mar 07 22:18:05 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 1UDiCT-0001rO-He for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 07 Mar 2013 22:18:05 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46605 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UDiC7-00022B-OH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 07 Mar 2013 16:17:43 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:47268) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UDiC3-00021p-Rc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Mar 2013 16:17:41 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UDiC2-00011J-KI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Mar 2013 16:17:39 -0500 Original-Received: from smtp.cs.ucla.edu ([131.179.128.62]:53673) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UDiC2-0000zF-Ef for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 07 Mar 2013 16:17:38 -0500 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id DE4E939E8108; Thu, 7 Mar 2013 13:17:30 -0800 (PST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at smtp.cs.ucla.edu Original-Received: from smtp.cs.ucla.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (smtp.cs.ucla.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id P8pIzHBwjSS6; Thu, 7 Mar 2013 13:17:30 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from penguin.cs.ucla.edu (Penguin.CS.UCLA.EDU [131.179.64.200]) by smtp.cs.ucla.edu (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 7D7D739E8008; Thu, 7 Mar 2013 13:17:30 -0800 (PST) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:17.0) Gecko/20130219 Thunderbird/17.0.3 In-Reply-To: <513856A1.1050408@yandex.ru> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 131.179.128.62 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:157567 Archived-At: On 03/07/13 00:58, Dmitry Antipov wrote: > I guess that we don't want function call overhead for such a simple > things; these might be macros Let's not use macros unless we really need their power. Here it's not needed. My guess (without really knowing) is that making the functions inline doesn't buy much performance. When in doubt, it's usually better to use ordinary functions instead of inline.