From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?Mattias_Engdeg=C3=A5rd?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Time to merge scratch/correct-warning-pos into master, perhaps? Date: Sun, 16 Jan 2022 16:50:23 +0100 Message-ID: <924840B9-C416-42E5-A436-D21F16D058AC@acm.org> References: <83mtjwzwkb.fsf@gnu.org> <87r198ytog.fsf@gnus.org> <87zgnvyb5y.fsf@gnus.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 14.0 \(3654.120.0.1.13\)) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="40354"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Alan Mackenzie , Eli Zaretskii , Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Jan 16 16:51:57 2022 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 1n97oz-000AHU-85 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 16 Jan 2022 16:51:57 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51314 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n97ox-0006Oi-Uz for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 16 Jan 2022 10:51:55 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:46574) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n97nf-0004v0-Jb for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 16 Jan 2022 10:50:35 -0500 Original-Received: from mail209c50.megamailservers.eu ([91.136.10.219]:47702 helo=mail194c50.megamailservers.eu) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n97nc-0007uj-Ra; Sun, 16 Jan 2022 10:50:35 -0500 X-Authenticated-User: mattiase@bredband.net DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=megamailservers.eu; s=maildub; t=1642348227; bh=0k2rPjDshKL1N2vihuWgsDaYMITUaRpAuuTWsLUvJ/U=; h=Subject:From:In-Reply-To:Date:Cc:References:To:From; b=MpThwgco1PEvzgEEJKgj1A05ZB0grGeRral18UCWpsN2gy+F+wAaG60Djx0qDcc8P qWAYLdQXEnRvGdeqJ0K7Pr585RNkr65V3NPYQmQ+4ScoAfhK0cAAXDAeUSxdOa7Vp2 uYu7kIc+U1oSEVtUV0zb5x239Q77Ts7uXZ9ZtVqI= Feedback-ID: mattiase@acm.or Original-Received: from smtpclient.apple (c188-150-171-71.bredband.tele2.se [188.150.171.71]) (authenticated bits=0) by mail194c50.megamailservers.eu (8.14.9/8.13.1) with ESMTP id 20GFoOnG013430; Sun, 16 Jan 2022 15:50:25 +0000 In-Reply-To: <87zgnvyb5y.fsf@gnus.org> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3654.120.0.1.13) X-CTCH-RefID: str=0001.0A742F22.61E43EC2.0056, ss=1, re=0.000, recu=0.000, reip=0.000, cl=1, cld=1, fgs=0 X-CTCH-VOD: Unknown X-CTCH-Spam: Unknown X-CTCH-Score: 0.000 X-CTCH-Flags: 0 X-CTCH-ScoreCust: 0.000 X-Origin-Country: SE Received-SPF: softfail client-ip=91.136.10.219; envelope-from=mattiase@acm.org; helo=mail194c50.megamailservers.eu X-Spam_score_int: -18 X-Spam_score: -1.9 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.9 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_SOFTFAIL=0.665 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:284832 Archived-At: 16 jan. 2022 kl. 16.04 skrev Lars Ingebrigtsen : > Yes. I've now done a few more realistic non-micro benchmarks -- > (eww-open-file "/tmp/foo.html") -- and I see no measurable performance > impact there at all. The time to run Relint on the Emacs tree is up about 3.0 =C2=B1 0.2 %. A = lot of it is spent in reading files and in the regexp engine, neither of = which use `eq` much. It erases some (but not all) of the progress being made elsewhere. Micro-benchmarking code using `eq` a lot shows an overhead of about 50 = %.