From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Achim Gratz Subject: Re: [RFC] Org version of the Org manual Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2013 09:44:46 +0100 Message-ID: <87ppzczzlt.fsf@Rainer.invalid> References: <87ehfuonx6.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <87zjyhotvi.fsf@yagnesh.org> <8738w90wmq.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <87r4jt53ts.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:49539) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UDACm-0004oL-F3 for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Mar 2013 04:00:09 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UDACh-00022F-3p for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Mar 2013 04:00:08 -0500 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:46944) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UDACg-0001yU-TC for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Mar 2013 04:00:03 -0500 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UD9yV-0006Cm-8F for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Mar 2013 09:45:23 +0100 Received: from pd9eb3e13.dip.t-dialin.net ([217.235.62.19]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 06 Mar 2013 09:45:23 +0100 Received: from Stromeko by pd9eb3e13.dip.t-dialin.net with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Wed, 06 Mar 2013 09:45:23 +0100 List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Bastien writes: >> org-macro-replace-all 2 222.371024 111.185512 > > This one looks suspicious: if the function does what it says, > why does it run twice? If we can spare 111 secs here, that's > already an improvement. I'll have a look at some point but > feel free to beat me on this! That interpretation makes assumptions that may not be valid. I'm not even sure that you can rely on the number of calls (elp may miss some at least), but especially not that each call takes the same time. So it is perfectly possible that the first call took 222 seconds and the second one just 0.371024… The top entry for profiler btw is "called-interactively". How helpful. Regards, Achim. -- +<[Q+ Matrix-12 WAVE#46+305 Neuron microQkb Andromeda XTk Blofeld]>+ Factory and User Sound Singles for Waldorf rackAttack: http://Synth.Stromeko.net/Downloads.html#WaldorfSounds