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: Understanding dotimes skipping by 2 Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2018 15:23:30 +0300 Message-ID: <83efdd7qv1.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20180927224840.GA2161@mail.akwebsoft.com> <87efdem1fx.fsf@phil.uni-goettingen.de> <0011E5D8-A8DD-4829-AB06-502E14122CF7@scratch.space> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1538137335 25199 195.159.176.226 (28 Sep 2018 12:22:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2018 12:22:15 +0000 (UTC) To: Help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Sep 28 14:22:11 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 1g5rmc-0006QG-4B for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Sep 2018 14:22:10 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:43144 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g5roi-0000kM-Ol for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 28 Sep 2018 08:24:20 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:34745) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g5roK-0000kF-N3 for Help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Sep 2018 08:23:57 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g5roF-0002IU-83 for Help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Sep 2018 08:23:56 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:51775) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1g5roD-0002Hl-Ad for Help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Sep 2018 08:23:51 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=1695 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1g5roB-0007Do-T0 for Help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 28 Sep 2018 08:23:49 -0400 In-reply-to: <0011E5D8-A8DD-4829-AB06-502E14122CF7@scratch.space> (message from Van L on Fri, 28 Sep 2018 19:50:12 +1000) 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:118050 Archived-At: > From: Van L > Date: Fri, 28 Sep 2018 19:50:12 +1000 > > > The 1+ syntactic sugar seems to cost performance by needing more lines of code Please compare the actual performance, not the LOC. The correlation between those two is not necessarily high. Also, arith_driver is a function with non-zero LOC, and you should include that in the metrics, at least. > and it is less general in power to process the argument list if it were to be extended like (+ x 1 2 3). Of course it's less general: otherwise, why have a separate function?