From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: profiler-report seems to be missing data? Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 21:46:59 +0300 Message-ID: <83o9e3ii1o.fsf@gnu.org> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1534358736 8493 195.159.176.226 (15 Aug 2018 18:45:36 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 18:45:36 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Aug 15 20:45:32 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1fq0nT-00027Q-Go for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 20:45:31 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:51196 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fq0pZ-0001Jo-W1 for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 14:47:42 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42097) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fq0p4-0001JK-2c for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 14:47:10 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fq0p0-0003LJ-Pf for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 14:47:09 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:53938) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fq0p0-0003Kz-Kp for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 14:47:06 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=1891 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1fq0oz-0001nQ-O2 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 15 Aug 2018 14:47:06 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Charlie Andrews on Wed, 15 Aug 2018 11:00:50 -0400) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "help-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:117663 Archived-At: > From: Charlie Andrews > Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2018 11:00:50 -0400 > > The profiler report seems to blame the `let*` function within > `ftf-project-files-hash`. > > However, looking at that function: > > (defun ftf-project-files-hash () > "Returns a hashtable filled with file names as the key and " > (let ((default-directory (ftf-project-directory)) > (table (make-hash-table :test 'equal))) > (mapcar (lambda (file) > (let* ((file-name (file-name-nondirectory file)) > (full-path (expand-file-name file)) > (pathlist (cons full-path (gethash file-name table > nil)))) > (puthash file-name pathlist table))) > (split-string (ftf-project-files-string))) > table)) > > It seems incredibly unlikely that `let*` is the slow part, but rather one > of the functions called within that `let*`. > > Why is `profiler-report` stopping at `let*` rather than telling me which > component of that `let*` is slow? How can I dig deeper to find which > exactly function is slow? Was the code you profiled byte-compiled? If so, load the relevant .el file, and then re-run the profiling session. You might obtain a much more detailed and accurate profile.