From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Skipping unexec via a big .elc file Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 10:15:05 -0400 Message-ID: References: <83h98nidvd.fsf@gnu.org> <87eg3rvtsf.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <83k2dihpm9.fsf@gnu.org> <8760p2wzgj.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <838ttyhhzu.fsf@gnu.org> <871szqwu51.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> <831szqhbc2.fsf@gnu.org> <87d1itt79z.fsf_-_@users.sourceforge.net> <7baa18d4-2b09-caa8-005e-29008a383ad1@cs.ucla.edu> <83mvhwrgd5.fsf@gnu.org> <8539f38f-9a11-44c3-4de7-bb974c96206c@cs.ucla.edu> <8360ojpndr.fsf@gnu.org> <83shrnm0k1.fsf@gnu.org> <83oa2a5krl.fsf@gnu.org> <83pomp51yw.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1477321935 20201 195.159.176.226 (24 Oct 2016 15:12:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 24 Oct 2016 15:12:15 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.2.50 (gnu/linux) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Oct 24 17:12:10 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1byguh-0002A6-7V for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 17:11:47 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47319 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1byguj-0007rt-Gs for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 11:11:49 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:53479) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1byg79-0006I4-66 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 10:20:40 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1byg75-0002YM-6t for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 10:20:35 -0400 Original-Received: from [195.159.176.226] (port=41782 helo=blaine.gmane.org) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1byg75-0002Y3-04 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 10:20:31 -0400 Original-Received: from list by blaine.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1byg6c-0007o6-W2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 24 Oct 2016 16:20:02 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Original-Lines: 11 Original-X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:N64QLfcULLTK/J1DAEerQrmqlFc= X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 195.159.176.226 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.21 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:208690 Archived-At: >> The way I explained it to myself is that the lread.c code is much >> less affected (e.g. it should almost be unaffected by enable_checking). > Reading Lisp involves a lot of CPU-intensive processing. Yes, but it's a different kind of code, so it may be affected differently. In any case, I have no concrete data to back up this intuition and I don't believe it very strongly either. Stefan