From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: lax matching is not a great default behavior Date: Tue, 01 Dec 2015 21:36:18 +0200 Message-ID: <83si3mj70t.fsf@gnu.org> References: <837fl2qzs2.fsf@gnu.org> <83610ikvto.fsf@gnu.org> <87vb8iqa0l.fsf@udel.edu> <83wpsyj8ue.fsf@gnu.org> <87y4dermlz.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1448998726 6961 80.91.229.3 (1 Dec 2015 19:38:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 1 Dec 2015 19:38:46 +0000 (UTC) Cc: mvoteiza@udel.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: David Kastrup Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Dec 01 20:38:37 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1a3qkl-00049d-Kj for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 01 Dec 2015 20:38:19 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54573 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a3qkk-0001Mr-PT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 01 Dec 2015 14:38:18 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56452) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a3qkg-0001Ml-Ec for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Dec 2015 14:38:15 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a3qkf-0000RF-Jf for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Dec 2015 14:38:14 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout26.012.net.il ([80.179.55.182]:58591) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a3qkb-0000QK-LM; Tue, 01 Dec 2015 14:38:09 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.mtaout26.012.net.il by mtaout26.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NYP00C0026B5C00@mtaout26.012.net.il>; Tue, 01 Dec 2015 21:39:03 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.94.185.246]) by mtaout26.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NYP00AO72L27530@mtaout26.012.net.il>; Tue, 01 Dec 2015 21:39:03 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <87y4dermlz.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 80.179.55.182 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:195710 Archived-At: > From: David Kastrup > Cc: Mark Oteiza , emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Tue, 01 Dec 2015 20:32:24 +0100 > > Optimization does not tend to make staggering differences. In my measurements, an optimized binary is 2 to 3 times faster than an unoptimized one. That's something that is very visible in day-to-day user experience. > There is something to be said for Emacs developers trying to work > with the defaults and not just silently reconfigure them when they > get in the way of productivity not just because of old habits but > because of actual ergonomic or performance problems. I don't reconfigure them, FWIW. > Developers are less likely to suffer from the "I guess it is supposed to > be that way" disease, so they in particular should think twice before > just reconfiguring. Agreed. But after thinking twice, there's no need to think the third time.