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: C and Emacs Lisp code parts Date: Fri, 01 Jul 2016 11:13:51 +0300 Message-ID: <83ziq1u668.fsf@gnu.org> References: <624c3d37-c829-7187-a699-7d7bbc211a20@online.de> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1467360936 4143 80.91.229.3 (1 Jul 2016 08:15:36 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 08:15:36 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Andreas =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=B6hler?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jul 01 10:15:31 2016 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 1bItbl-0002NK-52 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 01 Jul 2016 10:15:29 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:54372 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bItbk-0004ex-C8 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 01 Jul 2016 04:15:28 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:50919) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bItaZ-0004Kr-JP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Jul 2016 04:14:20 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bItaT-0002Fo-HM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 01 Jul 2016 04:14:14 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:54394) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1bItaT-0002Fk-EP; Fri, 01 Jul 2016 04:14:09 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1394 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1bItaS-0003Ie-D6; Fri, 01 Jul 2016 04:14:08 -0400 In-reply-to: <624c3d37-c829-7187-a699-7d7bbc211a20@online.de> (message from Andreas =?utf-8?Q?R=C3=B6hler?= on Fri, 1 Jul 2016 10:03:07 +0200) 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: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:205020 Archived-At: > From: Andreas Röhler > Date: Fri, 1 Jul 2016 10:03:07 +0200 > > last years parts of C code have been switched into the Lisp area. There > are pro and cons, the cons seems to be an easier maintenance, to protect > against the lack of skilled C-developers. > > The backside is a general slowness, not felt in details of such a > change, but cumulated.Would liketo see this strategy changed. Rather > focus at a fast and small core. Reduce the rate of changes maybe. My > preferred Emacs must not provide everything, but be quick and reliable > and easy to extend. Emacs Lisp seen as designed for the user-space. To compare performance, we need a performance test suite. Without measuring the impact of these changes, we cannot rationally discuss the alleged slowdown. This has been discussed before, but AFAIK no one is working on that. Volunteers are welcome to work on such a performance test suite. Once available, we can make it mandatory for the results to be presented when someone comes with a suggestion to move code from C to Lisp, or vice versa.