From: Daniel Colascione <dancol@dancol.org>
To: Stefan <monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA>
Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org
Subject: Re: [Emacs-diffs] emacs-24 r116836: Fix keyword argument parsing. Please bootstrap.
Date: Sun, 23 Mar 2014 19:58:26 -0700 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <532F9F52.8020906@dancol.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <532F9AFF.1020108@dancol.org>
[-- Attachment #1: Type: text/plain, Size: 1738 bytes --]
On 03/23/2014 07:39 PM, Daniel Colascione wrote:
> On 03/23/2014 06:43 PM, Stefan wrote:
>>> + * emacs-lisp/cl-macs.el (cl--do-arglist): Use a little `cl-loop'
>>> + list to look for keyword arguments instead of `memq', fixing
>>> + (Bug#3647) --- unfortunately, only for freshly-compiled code.
>>> + Please make bootstrap.
>>
>> Have you checked the performance and code-size impact of this change?
>> Maybe it's OK to try it on trunk, but it seems much too risky
>> performancewise for 24.4. There is no hurry to fix this: the bug has
>> been with us forever (IIRC it was even documented in CL's texinfo).
>
> The new code ranges from about a half to a third of the speed of the old
> code, measured by byte-compiled, lexically-bound functions that just
> return lists of their arguments. Code size increases as well: with the
> old code, the 7-old keyword noop function requires 99 bytecode
> instructions, while the new code generates 371 instructions.
>
> IMHO, that's fine, since keyword argument parsing isn't particularly
> fast to begin with and shouldn't be on any hot path.
>
> If we really care about performance here, we can add a subr that works
> like assq (`assq-plist' ?), but that skips every other list element.
> This approach should will yield correct semantics and shouldn't be any
> slower (or larger) than the existing code. If you want to do it that
> way, I'll back out my change from the emacs-24 branch and write
> something better for trunk.
Or we can just use plist-member. plist-member produces code that's only
10% slower than the old code and 7% larger: we have an opcode for memq,
but not for plist-member. Is that performance difference small enough
for emacs-24?
[-- Attachment #2: OpenPGP digital signature --]
[-- Type: application/pgp-signature, Size: 901 bytes --]
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2014-03-24 2:58 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
[not found] <E1WRbSg-00088X-MH@vcs.savannah.gnu.org>
2014-03-24 1:43 ` [Emacs-diffs] emacs-24 r116836: Fix keyword argument parsing. Please bootstrap Stefan
2014-03-24 2:39 ` Daniel Colascione
2014-03-24 2:58 ` Daniel Colascione [this message]
2014-03-24 13:12 ` Stefan
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=532F9F52.8020906@dancol.org \
--to=dancol@dancol.org \
--cc=emacs-devel@gnu.org \
--cc=monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this external index
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.