[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Gnu Emacs way slower than XEmacs
From: |
Miles Bader |
Subject: |
Re: Gnu Emacs way slower than XEmacs |
Date: |
Tue, 22 Apr 2003 11:09:20 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.3.28i |
On Tue, Apr 22, 2003 at 10:15:05AM -0400, David Abrahams wrote:
> > Um, it might help if you actually said what operation is slower....
>
> Almost anything. `M-g' to get new message headers is one example, but
> downloading a large message (with, say, a several-megabyte
> attachment), shows a really remarkable difference in speed.
Almost anything, like C-f, C-n, and M-x hanoi?
At least in this message you gave an example -- M-g (I assume in a gnus
summary buffer) -- but even that is very vague. Is it only with imap (as you
previously implied)? Does it happen with local (file) mailboxes too? Pop3?
If you want to report a bug, please give specific examples, with lots of
details! What may be obvious to you isn't necessarily obvious to the rest of
us; see the info node `(emacs)Bugs'.
-Miles
--
I have seen the enemy, and he is us. -- Pogo
- Gnu Emacs way slower than XEmacs, David Abrahams, 2003/04/22
- Re: Gnu Emacs way slower than XEmacs, Miles Bader, 2003/04/22
- Re: Gnu Emacs way slower than XEmacs, David Abrahams, 2003/04/22
- Re: Gnu Emacs way slower than XEmacs,
Miles Bader <=
- Re: Gnu Emacs way slower than XEmacs, David Abrahams, 2003/04/22
- Re: Gnu Emacs way slower than XEmacs, Kai Großjohann, 2003/04/22
- Re: Gnu Emacs way slower than XEmacs, David Abrahams, 2003/04/23
- Re: Gnu Emacs way slower than XEmacs, Kai Großjohann, 2003/04/23
- Re: Gnu Emacs way slower than XEmacs, Eli Zaretskii, 2003/04/23
- Re: Gnu Emacs way slower than XEmacs, David Abrahams, 2003/04/23
- Re: Gnu Emacs way slower than XEmacs, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2003/04/24
- Re: Gnu Emacs way slower than XEmacs, Simon Josefsson, 2003/04/24
- Re: Gnu Emacs way slower than XEmacs, David Abrahams, 2003/04/24
- Re: Gnu Emacs way slower than XEmacs, Simon Josefsson, 2003/04/24