Richard Stallman <rms@gnu.org> writes:

> How does native-compiled Emacs Lisp code compare with native-compiled
> src/*.c?  The main difference is that native-compiled Emacs Lisp code
> is optional -- you don't _need_ it to run Emacs.  This means that the
> upside of distributing that particular compiled code is less -- but
> the downside is the same.

The upside is that packages have lower startup time, which is less, yes.

But the downside is also less than with shipping pure binaries, because
platforms without shipped native-compiled code will just have a longer
startup time, but the package will still work. The package also works
for them if there is no native compiler for the platform at all.

So this is not so much like shipping binaries, but rather like providing
a pre-filled cache for known use-cases.

Best wishes,
Arne
-- 
Unpolitisch sein
heißt politisch sein,
ohne es zu merken.
draketo.de