⁣Sent from BlueMail ​

On 25 Aug 2018, 18:14, at 18:14, Radon Rosborough <radon.neon@gmail.com> wrote:
>> If the messages are just printed in the message buffer it shouldn't
>> impact too much the startup time I think.
>
>To do the kind of analysis you are talking about, one would have to
>hook into really basic subroutines like `setq`. I don't have any
>numbers to back this up, but that sounds like it would be a massive
>slowdown for all Elisp code. Alternatively, you'd have to do a lot of
>heavy static analysis because what defines a "outdated, deprecated, or
>useless" setting is actually quite nebulous and complicated.
>
>I do actually think this is an interesting idea, but it would
>definitely best be implemented as either a third-party package or some
>optional user library in core that either does static analysis or
>allows one to load the init-file with profiling enabled like ESUP [1]
>(or both).
>
>> a number of people find even an extra 0.5s-1.0s in startup to be
>> significant
>
>I am one of those people, and actually I find even an extra 50ms of
>startup time to be unacceptable unless there's a good reason for it.
>My ~5,000 line configuration [2] which pulls in ~130 packages takes
>only ~250ms to load, according to a startup profiler -- meaning 0.6s
>to go from nothing to a full graphical frame.
>
>Why bother with the Emacs server when you can just make Emacs start up
>as fast as Vim? ;)
>
>[1]: https://github.com/jschaf/esup
>[2]: https://github.com/raxod502/radian