From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: 64 bit official Windows builds Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2016 19:29:29 +0100 Message-ID: <874mdjxdh2.fsf@wanadoo.es> References: <2577057e-98d3-41ce-ade2-1496648b09c3@googlegroups.com> <8337t3qdpd.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1454956247 26407 80.91.229.3 (8 Feb 2016 18:30:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2016 18:30:47 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 08 19:30:38 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@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 1aSqa5-0007V0-M9 for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 19:30:37 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47640 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSqa5-0006ik-5g for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 13:30:37 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41379) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSqZA-0005lc-FZ for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 13:29:41 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSqZ6-00054u-Ec for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 13:29:40 -0500 Original-Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:34053) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aSqZ6-00054l-83 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 13:29:36 -0500 Original-Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aSqZ4-00068h-MK for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 19:29:34 +0100 Original-Received: from 1.red-83-38-42.dynamicip.rima-tde.net ([83.38.42.1]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 19:29:34 +0100 Original-Received: from ofv by 1.red-83-38-42.dynamicip.rima-tde.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 19:29:34 +0100 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 13 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: 1.red-83-38-42.dynamicip.rima-tde.net User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:APvbwp15aUbXaOpaaHd0Em5M2n0= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 80.91.229.3 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:109054 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: > Third, when Emacs is built with a 64-bit compiler, it runs faster, not > slower, because running a 32-bit executable on a 64-bit Windows > requires expensive thunking for every call to any Windows API, > something that happens a lot. For a pointer-chasing program like Emacs, data cache effects are orders of magnitude more expensive than thunking. That's what I observe with similar applications. As for Emacs, I see no performance difference among 32 bit and 64 bit executables, for ordinary use. That's how it should be: a good interactive application is never supposed to make the user wait, and Emacs does a decent job at that.