Re: Did `inline' used to do something else?

[Eric Abrahamsen <eric@ericabrahamsen.net>]

Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen@web.de> writes:

> Joost Kremers <joostkremers@fastmail.fm> writes:
>
>>
>>    ;;; byte-compile optimizers to support inlining
>>
>>    (put 'inline 'byte-optimizer 'byte-optimize-inline-handler)
>>
>> Followed by a definition of `byte-optimize-inline-handler'. There's no
>> mention of the symbol property `byte-optimizer' [...]
>
> That property is referenced by `byte-optimize-form' (in "byte-opt.el").
> Also see the flag `byte-optimize'.
>
> If you set `byte-optimize-log', you should be able to get a log of
> applied optimizations when compiling something.

Thanks a bunch to both of you! That was a very interesting deep dive,
and I hope will eventually allow me to write better code.

I suppose the new-ish `define-inline' can be used instead of making
explicit calls to `inline', but either way I'll try to make sure I
preserve the effect.

Emanuel Berg <moasen@zoho.com> writes:

[...]

> By the way it is interesting that Gnus is what
> brought this issue up to date because Gnus (or
> Emacs Lisp) has speed issues and one way in
> Gnus to counteract it is the presence of
> very long functions.

My observation so far is that Gnus has lots of this sort of
micro-optimization, but that much of the slowness comes from how the
larger routines and data structures work. In fairness, we have a lot of
tools now that weren't present when Gnus was written.

Eric