|
From: | Dmitry Gutov |
Subject: | Re: Reliable after-change-functions (via: Using incremental parsing in Emacs) |
Date: | Sat, 4 Apr 2020 19:09:58 +0300 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:68.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/68.4.1 |
On 04.04.2020 16:02, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
I don't believe these results. It's night impossible for a -O2 optimized program to be 5 times faster than a -Og optimized. And benchmark.el doesn't seem to be so different from time-it, modulo the function call. Moreover, Alan's method does time redisplay, whereas Dmitry's method does not.
Unfortunately I can confirm the difference. When Emacs is recompiled with the default optimizations, (benchmark 1 '(progn (find-file "src/xdisp.c")))reports ~0.13s when FS cache is warm (compared to ~0.78 with the most recent -Og build here).
And (benchmark 1 '(progn (find-file "src/xdisp.c") (goto-char (point-max)) (sit-for 0))) reports ~0.29s.Maybe CC Mode exercises some primitives that are hit especially hard by the lack of optimization.
Emacs looks snappier overall (e.g. during startup, loading my custom configuration with all its packages), but probably within the bounds of 50-70% difference.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |