[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Should we land Lisp reader optimizations?
From: |
Clément Pit-Claudel |
Subject: |
Re: Should we land Lisp reader optimizations? |
Date: |
Tue, 20 Jun 2017 11:39:36 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.1.1 |
On 2017-06-20 11:25, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> In any case, a 13x speedup sounds very impressive, so I think we want
> this on master as soon as you can do it.
>
> What do others think?
I think this looks like fabulous work. If I read this correctly #2, #3, #4,
and #8 all contribute, and they are all relatively localized/small, so it all
sounds very good.
Clément.
- Should we land Lisp reader optimizations?, Eli Zaretskii, 2017/06/19
- Re: Should we land Lisp reader optimizations?, Ken Raeburn, 2017/06/20
- Re: Should we land Lisp reader optimizations?, Ken Raeburn, 2017/06/20
- Re: Should we land Lisp reader optimizations?, John Wiegley, 2017/06/20
- Re: Should we land Lisp reader optimizations?, michael schuldt, 2017/06/20
- Re: Should we land Lisp reader optimizations?, Ken Raeburn, 2017/06/21
- Re: Should we land Lisp reader optimizations?, Eli Zaretskii, 2017/06/21
- Re: Should we land Lisp reader optimizations?, Richard Stallman, 2017/06/21
- Re: Should we land Lisp reader optimizations?, michael schuldt, 2017/06/21
- Re: Should we land Lisp reader optimizations?, John Wiegley, 2017/06/22
- Re: Should we land Lisp reader optimizations?, Stefan Monnier, 2017/06/22
- Re: Should we land Lisp reader optimizations?, Richard Stallman, 2017/06/21