From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Roland Winkler" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Is compiling autoloads useful? Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2011 09:11:48 -0600 Message-ID: <20194.9524.974939.951450@gargle.gargle.HOWL> References: <20193.57279.774332.141767@gargle.gargle.HOWL> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1323443529 305 80.91.229.12 (9 Dec 2011 15:12:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 9 Dec 2011 15:12:09 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Dec 09 16:12:05 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RZ27I-0004nk-Gd for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2011 16:12:04 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42131 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RZ27I-0000IK-0J for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2011 10:12:04 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:53994) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RZ27A-0000BH-Ke for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2011 10:12:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RZ276-0000JG-Ht for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2011 10:11:56 -0500 Original-Received: from essmail.ess.niu.edu ([131.156.1.18]:34754) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RZ276-0000J0-7V for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Dec 2011 10:11:52 -0500 Original-Received: from regnitz (lukas.physics.niu.edu [131.156.85.221]) by essmail.ess.niu.edu (8.14.3/8.14.3) with ESMTP id pB9FBngP020928; Fri, 9 Dec 2011 09:11:50 -0600 (CST) In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: VM 8.2 trial under 24.0.90.2 (x86_64-unknown-linux-gnu) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 131.156.1.18 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:146604 Archived-At: On Fri Dec 9 2011 Stefan Monnier wrote: > > The Makefile used by the rather old BBDB v2 compiles the file > > with BBDB autoloads. Does such a step offer any advantage with a > > recent version of GNU Emacs? > > It all depends on what gets put in there. But if you only get calls to > `autoload' and a few calls to `add-to-list', byte-compilation should not > make any difference to the speed of the code. Thanks! The file bbdb-autoloads.el is much like the various *loaddefs.el in the lisp directory (which are not compiled either). It contains a bunch of autoloads only, except for the lines (provide 'bbdb-autoloads) (if (and load-file-name (file-name-directory load-file-name)) (add-to-list 'load-path (file-name-directory load-file-name))) > Some people have reported that byte-compiling their .emacs makes a > measurable difference to their Emacs's startup time, tho, so there > might some advantage, but I must say I don't know where it comes > from I'll try to see whether I can get any measureable difference. Yet I assume if compiling it made a noticable difference, then compiling the much bigger standard lisp/loaddefs.el should speed up startup yet more. Roland