From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Tomas Hlavaty Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: funcall consing Date: Sun, 02 Jan 2022 16:59:20 +0100 Message-ID: <87bl0u5dt3.fsf@logand.com> References: <87ee5tm422.fsf@logand.com> <83fsq9gdhw.fsf@gnu.org> <8335m8hazn.fsf@gnu.org> <83pmpbgbmr.fsf@gnu.org> <87ee5q5kox.fsf@logand.com> <838rvydwlx.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="34051"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Jan 02 17:00:26 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1n43HV-0008dT-UT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 02 Jan 2022 17:00:25 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45638 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n43HU-0000dT-UU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 02 Jan 2022 11:00:24 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:55488) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n43Gb-0008Pr-Rx for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 02 Jan 2022 10:59:29 -0500 Original-Received: from logand.com ([37.48.87.44]:59874) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1n43Ga-0000gQ-BW; Sun, 02 Jan 2022 10:59:29 -0500 Original-Received: by logand.com (Postfix, from userid 1001) id C5D3019EC87; Sun, 2 Jan 2022 16:59:23 +0100 (CET) X-Mailer: emacs 27.2 (via feedmail 11-beta-1 I) In-Reply-To: <838rvydwlx.fsf@gnu.org> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=37.48.87.44; envelope-from=tom@logand.com; helo=logand.com X-Spam_score_int: 0 X-Spam_score: -0.0 X-Spam_bar: / X-Spam_report: (-0.0 / 5.0 requ) SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:283922 Archived-At: On Sun 02 Jan 2022 at 16:46, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Otherwise benchmark-run is not really useful for what I need. In that >> case, what is the preferred way to measure execution speed and consing? > > My suggestion is to examine and analyze the output of garbage-collect. > There are also the various *-cells-consed variables you could use. thank you, I'll have a look