From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Emanuel Berg Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Is Elisp really that slow? (was: Why is Elisp slow?) Date: Sun, 12 May 2019 01:09:09 +0200 Message-ID: <86a7fsfv1m.fsf@zoho.eu> References: <87sgtwboot.fsf@telefonica.net> <83muk4obfd.fsf@gnu.org> <20190502214006.4fdsinp7u5xuqvdv@Ergus> <20190503004416.xfuzzucflp6bxpuz@Ergus> <8736lm30lz.fsf@web.de> <864l61j04d.fsf@zoho.eu> <20190511073254.GB29829@tuxteam.de> <04187AB9-AD7D-492D-A890-BCB01848370C@icloud.com> <20190511075712.GD29829@tuxteam.de> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="196520"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1 (gnu/linux) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun May 12 01:19:08 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hPbGj-000p0A-C6 for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 12 May 2019 01:19:05 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36343 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hPbGi-0002nd-CO for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 11 May 2019 19:19:04 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:48032) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hPbGN-0002kg-Ce for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 11 May 2019 19:18:44 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hPb7I-0004Kh-Nt for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 11 May 2019 19:09:22 -0400 Original-Received: from [195.159.176.226] (port=57748 helo=blaine.gmane.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1hPb7H-0004JB-3H for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 11 May 2019 19:09:19 -0400 Original-Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1hPb7E-000eNP-7E for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 12 May 2019 01:09:16 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Mail-Followup-To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Mail-Copies-To: never Cancel-Lock: sha1:kuJcMrmjUA4tO+VoW9GLGANXO7A= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 195.159.176.226 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:120305 Archived-At: tomas wrote: > Show us the benchmarks. How do people do benchmarks when it comes to comparing the speed of different computer languages? Do you solve a wide/varied set of problems (the same set) with different languages and then compare the wall clock execution time? Perhaps using an atomic clock in a sterile environment? Now, while that would be interesting to do, I think it's pretty clear Elisp would benefit from more speed. Maybe it is not slow for its purposes, but it ain't fast either, sure is my impression. -- underground experts united http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573