From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Abrahams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Gnu Emacs way slower than XEmacs Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 08:21:45 -0400 Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: References: <84r87ulpts.fsf@boost-consulting.com> <87u1cqy8jc.fsf@tleepslib.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <84d6jetmfg.fsf@lucy.is.informatik.uni-duisburg.de> <87r87up9qi.fsf@nyaumo.jasonrumney.net> <873ck9x6qi.fsf@tleepslib.sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> <87k7dlogsp.fsf@nyaumo.jasonrumney.net> <3759-Wed23Apr2003113638+0300-eliz@elta.co.il> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1051101760 17114 80.91.224.249 (23 Apr 2003 12:42:40 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 23 Apr 2003 12:42:40 +0000 (UTC) Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 23 14:42:39 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 198JZJ-0004Ms-00 for ; Wed, 23 Apr 2003 14:41:45 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 198Jf3-0002tl-00 for ; Wed, 23 Apr 2003 14:47:41 +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 198JYi-0005tb-07 for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Wed, 23 Apr 2003 08:41:08 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 198JWm-0004qE-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Apr 2003 08:39:08 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10.13) id 198JWe-0004jG-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Apr 2003 08:39:01 -0400 Original-Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.224.249]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10.13) id 198JP2-0002Lk-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 23 Apr 2003 08:31:08 -0400 Original-Received: from root by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 198JO5-0003ck-00 for ; Wed, 23 Apr 2003 14:30:09 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-Received: from news by main.gmane.org with local (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 198JFM-0002wL-00 for ; Wed, 23 Apr 2003 14:21:08 +0200 Original-Lines: 19 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org User-Agent: Gnus/5.090018 (Oort Gnus v0.18) XEmacs/21.4 (Native Windows TTY Support (Windows), windows-nt) Cancel-Lock: sha1:Iey9MuGrmWvjHmQFgfviuewd+r0= 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:13390 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:13390 "Eli Zaretskii" writes: >> From: Jason Rumney >> Date: 23 Apr 2003 07:43:02 +0100 >> >> A simple yes or no is sufficient, we are trying to determine whether >> there is a simple explanation for XEmacs being noticeably faster than >> GNU Emacs for network operations on Windows, or if it is due to a bug >> in GNU Emacs. > > Another relevant piece of information is whether the Windows build of > XEmacs is a native build or a Cygwin build. I see roughly the same snappiness from IMAP with either build of XEmacs. -- Dave Abrahams Boost Consulting www.boost-consulting.com