From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Chong Yidong Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs 23.0 is much slower starting than Emacs 22.3 Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 12:24:58 -0400 Message-ID: <87prlqezad.fsf@cyd.mit.edu> References: <20081022091136.GB924@muc.de> <20081022211202.GA1037@muc.de> <49001F5A.7040402@harpegolden.net> <20081023090908.GB2666@muc.de> <4900ACF9.7060501@harpegolden.net> <4900FF17.2000203@harpegolden.net> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1224865522 23974 80.91.229.12 (24 Oct 2008 16:25:22 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 24 Oct 2008 16:25:22 +0000 (UTC) Cc: acm@muc.de, Eli Zaretskii , david@harpegolden.net, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Lennart Borgman" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Oct 24 18:26:20 2008 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KtPUO-0004hx-Va for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 24 Oct 2008 18:26:17 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:57136 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KtPTJ-0006Uq-2R for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 24 Oct 2008 12:25:09 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KtPTC-0006TI-VF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Oct 2008 12:25:03 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KtPTA-0006R5-42 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Oct 2008 12:25:01 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=59602 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KtPT9-0006QY-0S for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 24 Oct 2008 12:24:59 -0400 Original-Received: from cyd.mit.edu ([18.115.2.24]:42104) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KtPT7-0005c0-KD; Fri, 24 Oct 2008 12:24:57 -0400 Original-Received: by cyd.mit.edu (Postfix, from userid 1000) id E079F57E099; Fri, 24 Oct 2008 12:24:58 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Lennart Borgman's message of "Fri, 24 Oct 2008 17:44:42 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:104951 Archived-At: "Lennart Borgman" writes: > The system calls (file-attributes, file-exists-p and file-modes) takes > nearly twice as long time in Emacs 23 (on w32). For normal-mode the > factor is even bigger, 3-4 times longer time. Could you try testing file-attributes, file-exists-p and file-modes in isolation, to see which one of the three are slower (or is it all three)?