From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Skipping unexec via a big .elc file Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 16:08:23 +0300 Message-ID: <83pomp51yw.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87eg51ng4r.fsf_-_@users.sourceforge.net> <87k2djwumn.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <83h98nidvd.fsf@gnu.org> <87eg3rvtsf.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <83k2dihpm9.fsf@gnu.org> <8760p2wzgj.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <838ttyhhzu.fsf@gnu.org> <871szqwu51.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <831szqhbc2.fsf@gnu.org> <87d1itt79z.fsf_-_@users.sourceforge.net> <7baa18d4-2b09-caa8-005e-29008a383ad1@cs.ucla.edu> <83mvhwrgd5.fsf@gnu.org> <8539f38f-9a11-44c3-4de7-bb974c96206c@cs.ucla.edu> <8360ojpndr.fsf@gnu.org> <83shrnm0k1.fsf@gnu.org> <83oa2a5krl.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1477314736 23024 195.159.176.226 (24 Oct 2016 13:12:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 13:12:16 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Oct 24 15:12:12 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1byf2p-0004Il-OI for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 15:12:03 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46677 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1byf2r-0005qn-O5 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 09:12:05 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36369) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1byezM-00035Q-2y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 09:08:32 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1byezI-0002PR-8b for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 09:08:28 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:48454) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1byezI-0002PN-5X; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 09:08:24 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:2136 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1byezH-0004eK-JG; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 09:08:24 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Stefan Monnier on Mon, 24 Oct 2016 08:47:49 -0400) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:208683 Archived-At: > From: Stefan Monnier > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 08:47:49 -0400 > > > so I cannot explain your comparable results with both versions, it > > doesn't match any of my experiences. > > The way I explained it to myself is that the lread.c code is much > less affected (e.g. it should almost be unaffected by enable_checking). Reading Lisp involves a lot of CPU-intensive processing. > BTW, have you tried my experiement on your side? No.