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: profiler-report seems to be missing data? Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2018 21:00:05 +0300 Message-ID: <83wosqgpju.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83600aiec6.fsf@gnu.org> <87600ae38v.fsf@web.de> <831sayi5k6.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1534442508 16179 195.159.176.226 (16 Aug 2018 18:01:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2018 18:01:48 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Aug 16 20:01:44 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 1fqMad-00045I-8y for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 20:01:43 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57554 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fqMcj-0007nl-Al for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:03:53 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56613) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fqMZM-0005LL-IA for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:00:25 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fqMZH-0004dU-JP for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:00:24 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:47545) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1fqMZH-0004dO-Et for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:00:19 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=4510 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1fqMZG-0000DF-2s for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 16 Aug 2018 14:00:19 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Charlie Andrews on Thu, 16 Aug 2018 13:33:19 -0400) 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:117676 Archived-At: > From: Charlie Andrews > Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2018 13:33:19 -0400 > Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org > > Sorry for the silly question: unless I'm changing some emacs-wide variable that might logically force some > recomputation in those buffers (like changing the gutter after which characters on a given line are highlighted > red, for example) or Emacs is under memory pressure, why would the number of buffers affect the time > required for let to run? When you bind a variable that automatically becomes buffer-local when set, Emacs needs to make that variable buffer-local in every other buffer you have, and that can take time if you have a lot of buffers. Emacs used to do this even in dead buffers (those which were killed, but not yet GCed), but we fixed that lately.