From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Emanuel Berg Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] Re: Bignum performance Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2023 08:20:51 +0200 Message-ID: <877cpqb5fg.fsf@dataswamp.org> References: <874jkzllqq.fsf@yahoo.com> <2dec78a7-76e0-8789-4d20-7f0f6effe28a@gmail.com> <87pm3neei7.fsf@dataswamp.org> <87cyzjdvpq.fsf@dataswamp.org> <871qfyfgjd.fsf@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="9598"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:Po6B6OZwBcGEpChRpAW/dR8w7+M= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Aug 20 08:57:26 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qXcNK-0002HK-9H for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 20 Aug 2023 08:57:26 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qXcMV-0002Kc-TS; Sun, 20 Aug 2023 02:56:36 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qXboE-0002Hu-Gu for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Aug 2023 02:21:10 -0400 Original-Received: from ciao.gmane.io ([116.202.254.214]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qXboA-00048m-42 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Aug 2023 02:21:10 -0400 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qXbo8-0000gg-Ii for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 20 Aug 2023 08:21:04 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Mail-Copies-To: never Received-SPF: pass client-ip=116.202.254.214; envelope-from=ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; helo=ciao.gmane.io X-Spam_score_int: -15 X-Spam_score: -1.6 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.6 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.25, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-Mailman-Approved-At: Sun, 20 Aug 2023 02:56:33 -0400 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:308952 Archived-At: Ihor Radchenko wrote: >> Now that Gerd has solved the little mystery why Fibonacci >> was seemingly so much faster on Common Lisp and we also got >> that performance gain patch from Ihor I don't know how much >> sense it makes to continue translating the emacs-benchmarks >> to Common Lisp, or rather if anyone is motivated enough to >> do it, but this is how far I got: >> >> https://dataswamp.org/~incal/cl/bench/ > > You can again compare Elisp with CL and let us know what is > being noticeably slower. It will be an indication that > something might be improved. Thanks, you are right, hopefully it will happen. -- underground experts united https://dataswamp.org/~incal