From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Eli Zaretskii" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Gnu Emacs way slower than XEmacs Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 21:40:13 +0300 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <9003-Wed23Apr2003214013+0300-eliz@elta.co.il> References: <84r87ulpts.fsf@boost-consulting.com> <84lly2lity.fsf@boost-consulting.com> <20030422150920.GA7693@gnu.org> <84n0iijz8u.fsf@boost-consulting.com> <848yu2tmc4.fsf@lucy.is.informatik.uni-duisburg.de> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1051123792 7699 80.91.224.249 (23 Apr 2003 18:49:52 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 18:49:52 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 23 20:49:50 2003 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 198PIJ-0001tf-00 for ; Wed, 23 Apr 2003 20:48:35 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 198POA-0006bN-00 for ; Wed, 23 Apr 2003 20:54:38 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 198PHe-0006s3-0A for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Wed, 23 Apr 2003 14:47:54 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 198PGt-0006Yo-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Apr 2003 14:47:07 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 198PF9-0005iL-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Apr 2003 14:45:22 -0400 Original-Received: from balder.inter.net.il ([192.114.186.15]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 198PCi-0004it-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Apr 2003 14:42:48 -0400 Original-Received: from zaretsky (tony08-194-32.inter.net.il [80.230.194.32] (may be forged)) by balder.inter.net.il (Mirapoint Messaging Server MOS 3.2.2-GA) with ESMTP id CHF68853; Wed, 23 Apr 2003 21:42:43 +0300 (IDT) Original-To: dave@boost-consulting.com X-Mailer: emacs 21.3.50 (via feedmail 8 I) and Blat ver 1.8.9 In-reply-to: (message from David Abrahams on Wed, 23 Apr 2003 08:19:56 -0400) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1b5 Precedence: list List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Archive: List-Unsubscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:13399 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:13399 > From: David Abrahams > Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 08:19:56 -0400 > > > > Maybe you can devise a sequence of function calls from imap.el that > > show the slowness? > > That's a bit beyond me. To really see it in a conclusive way, you > need to download a message with a large attachment. Then how about profiling the lengthy operation? See the instructions in elp.el for more details.