Re: Emacs pretest -- electric-pair-mode change

[joaotavora@gmail.com (João Távora)]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> Of course, scheduling aside, in the end that's always true :-).
> Scheduling is not really relevant here, since Emacs has only one
> thread that runs Lisp, and its other threads, if there are any, don't
> run any computation-intensive tasks that could yield user-visible
> speed differences.

I actually meant process scheduling, but yes assume no other relevant
threads or processes and the architecture/compiled code combination
determines it.

>>    http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2014-03/msg00930.html
>
> That just describes how Windows binaries are compiled, but says
> nothing about their speed relative to other systems.

It suggests they are compiled with -O0, as is indeed my current one,
just checked. But is it just these unofficial builds that are -O0?
nt/INSTALL seems to suggest so. Are the builds in
http://ftp.gnu.org/gnu/emacs/windows/ optimized?

>> But in general, is the machine-code for windows builds exactly the same
>> (or very similar) as linux for things involved in these operations?
> It's the same compiler (GCC) and similar or identical machine
> architectures, so I don't expect very different code.  Optimizations
> change things, of course, but only by a factor of about 2.  Any
> greater speed difference is due to something else.

I would expect that factor to vary according to type of operation. But
OK, that would make my w32 hardware about 3 times slower for that
particular syntax-ppss operation, since total time is about 6 times
greater, I haven't measured exactly.

> "M-: system-configuration-options RET"

Thanks for the tip!