From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Tassilo Horn Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: string> missing? Date: Fri, 05 Jun 2015 22:40:48 +0200 Message-ID: <87wpzhc2i7.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87oakxkvqw.fsf@petton.fr> <83zj4grgkc.fsf@gnu.org> <87sia8n8b5.fsf@petton.fr> <87zj4gu821.fsf@gnu.org> <83sia8rdkm.fsf@gnu.org> <83pp5crbfd.fsf@gnu.org> <837frjqzpk.fsf@gnu.org> <83wpzinfhy.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1433536912 31427 80.91.229.3 (5 Jun 2015 20:41:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 5 Jun 2015 20:41:52 +0000 (UTC) Cc: nicolas@petton.fr, nandryshak@gmail.com, rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jun 05 22:41:41 2015 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 1Z0yQc-0008Gg-2j for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 05 Jun 2015 22:41:22 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49499 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z0yQW-0003Dv-Ac for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 05 Jun 2015 16:41:16 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36468) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z0yQG-0003DS-KN for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Jun 2015 16:41:01 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z0yQ9-0007M3-DU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Jun 2015 16:41:00 -0400 Original-Received: from out4-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.28]:46361) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Z0yQ8-0007Ll-Ve for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Jun 2015 16:40:53 -0400 Original-Received: from compute5.internal (compute5.nyi.internal [10.202.2.45]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id CFA3F216CF for ; Fri, 5 Jun 2015 16:40:51 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute5.internal (MEProxy); Fri, 05 Jun 2015 16:40:51 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-sasl-enc :x-sasl-enc; s=smtpout; bh=RYf62G5b4+EYoKFJ98dWqE2V+yg=; b=JyJ7h 2hnySoyOJjQ71ow0NvyDa7FS02KxA+zq3/QFlS3/iuI7ZUgQOoI0PODkHSClg7VV qwTmzzMr465hPK7Uc9r/qhTjYfhfhNwSK+TOgvS4X59+L7/WvHc5zrdjIoYfnBy+ EaECxc8DjGupliYY1OZgfFeULAOCuzaoSnp9+I= X-Sasl-enc: LijPKYXtR9jT3UHCMHgTzMmK3ALvI6r7/uedggmIwDs9 1433536851 Original-Received: from thinkpad-t440p (unknown [2.161.152.223]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id A501EC00017; Fri, 5 Jun 2015 16:40:50 -0400 (EDT) Mail-Followup-To: Eli Zaretskii , rms@gnu.org, nicolas@petton.fr, nandryshak@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org In-Reply-To: <83wpzinfhy.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Fri, 05 Jun 2015 22:04:41 +0300") User-Agent: Gnus/5.130014 (Ma Gnus v0.14) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 66.111.4.28 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:187053 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> > You say that this goal no longer exists, but the practice of Emacs >> > maintenance tells me otherwise. We are still making optimization >> > changes, some of them quite deep and pervasive ones, for very little >> > benefits, like a few percents decrease in memory footprint or in CPU >> > usage, even under the most favorable conditions. >> >> Adding string> might be 200 bytes. Saving 200 bytes is insignificant. > > It was also insignificant back when you decided not to include it. Adding string> to Emacs proper is maybe additional 200 bytes but may save a multiple of its size when packages start using it instead of defining their own version each. For example, there are already gnus-string>, org-string>, and also org-string>=. And there are also quite many lambdas implementing string>, e.g., in emacs/lisp/help.el, so the addition of string> can in fact reduce the Emacs footprint if it gets used there. Bye, Tassilo