[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Why tree-sitter instead of Semantic? (was Re: CC Mode with font-lock
From: |
tomas |
Subject: |
Re: Why tree-sitter instead of Semantic? (was Re: CC Mode with font-lock-maximum-decoration 2) |
Date: |
Sat, 13 Aug 2022 07:14:16 +0200 |
On Sat, Aug 13, 2022 at 10:41:16AM +0600, Akib Azmain Turja wrote:
[...]
> Yeah, it's possible for very optimized Brainfuck code to beat poor C
> code. Emacs has a native compiler, and AFAIK it's a ahead of time (AOT)
> compiler. If you really need a JIT, do performance-critical things in
> Guile Scheme and use results from Emacs.
I wasn't talking about brainfuck, but about Lua. And about the fact
that performance is such a broad topic as to make sweeping assertions
(like "C is faster than...") almost always wrong in some way.
Of course, current C compilers are extremely good in the niche they
were designed for (AOT compiling, not extremely complex systems [1]),
because tons and tons of resources went into them already. When other
systems get that attention (see Stefan's example with Javascript in
this thread), you see results. They can play out advantages found in
other niches (no AOT, e.g. JIT) and so on.
As for Guile/Emacs, there are people working on that. Their approach,
though, is to teach Guile to understand Emacs Lisp. It moves slowly...
for a lack of resources.
Cheers
[1] Extremely complex systems are still possible, but very expensive.
Cf. the Linux kernel.
[2] e.g. https://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/GuileEmacs
--
t
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
- Re: Ideal performance of ELisp, (continued)
- Re: Ideal performance of ELisp, Lynn Winebarger, 2022/08/16
- Re: Ideal performance of ELisp, Andrea Corallo, 2022/08/16
- Re: Ideal performance of ELisp, Lynn Winebarger, 2022/08/17
- Re: Ideal performance of ELisp, Andrea Corallo, 2022/08/17
- Re: Ideal performance of ELisp, Lynn Winebarger, 2022/08/18
- Re: Why tree-sitter instead of Semantic? (was Re: CC Mode with font-lock-maximum-decoration 2), Akib Azmain Turja, 2022/08/12
- Re: Why tree-sitter instead of Semantic? (was Re: CC Mode with font-lock-maximum-decoration 2), tomas, 2022/08/12
- Re: Why tree-sitter instead of Semantic? (was Re: CC Mode with font-lock-maximum-decoration 2), Akib Azmain Turja, 2022/08/13
- Re: Why tree-sitter instead of Semantic? (was Re: CC Mode with font-lock-maximum-decoration 2),
tomas <=
- Re: Why tree-sitter instead of Semantic? (was Re: CC Mode with font-lock-maximum-decoration 2), Lynn Winebarger, 2022/08/13
- Re: Why tree-sitter instead of Semantic? (was Re: CC Mode with font-lock-maximum-decoration 2), Akib Azmain Turja, 2022/08/13
- Re: Why tree-sitter instead of Semantic? (was Re: CC Mode with font-lock-maximum-decoration 2), Eric Ludlam, 2022/08/14
- Re: Why tree-sitter instead of Semantic? (was Re: CC Mode with font-lock-maximum-decoration 2), Lynn Winebarger, 2022/08/16
- Re: Why tree-sitter instead of Semantic? (was Re: CC Mode with font-lock-maximum-decoration 2), Eric Ludlam, 2022/08/16
- Re: Why tree-sitter instead of Semantic? (was Re: CC Mode with font-lock-maximum-decoration 2), Tassilo Horn, 2022/08/10
- Re: Why tree-sitter instead of Semantic? (was Re: CC Mode with font-lock-maximum-decoration 2), Jostein Kjønigsen, 2022/08/13
- Re: Why tree-sitter instead of Semantic? (was Re: CC Mode with font-lock-maximum-decoration 2), Po Lu, 2022/08/13
- Re: Why tree-sitter instead of Semantic? (was Re: CC Mode with font-lock-maximum-decoration 2), Lynn Winebarger, 2022/08/16
- Re: Why tree-sitter instead of Semantic? (was Re: CC Mode with font-lock-maximum-decoration 2), Po Lu, 2022/08/16