From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on inbox.vuxu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.1 required=5.0 tests=DKIM_INVALID,DKIM_SIGNED, FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 Received: (qmail 19697 invoked from network); 17 Aug 2020 03:59:05 -0000 Received: from lists1.math.uh.edu (129.7.128.208) by inbox.vuxu.org with ESMTPUTF8; 17 Aug 2020 03:59:05 -0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.math.uh.edu) by lists1.math.uh.edu with smtp (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1k7WHx-007vY2-Us; Sun, 16 Aug 2020 22:58:25 -0500 Received: from mx2.math.uh.edu ([129.7.128.33]) by lists1.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1k7WHt-007vWB-An for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Sun, 16 Aug 2020 22:58:21 -0500 Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([95.216.78.240]) by mx2.math.uh.edu with esmtps (TLS1.3) tls TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (Exim 4.94) (envelope-from ) id 1k7WHq-00BfHA-NM for ding@lists.math.uh.edu; Sun, 16 Aug 2020 22:58:20 -0500 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnus.org; s=20200322; h=Content-Type:Mime-Version:References:Message-ID:Date:Subject: From:To:Sender:Reply-To:Cc:Content-Transfer-Encoding:Content-ID: Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender:Resent-To:Resent-Cc :Resent-Message-ID:In-Reply-To:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=5qPoaGIGw2sAZaZj4AAt1j6g+XAtZpvSs9EAghXK4+k=; b=JSuzpXAkyARU5iOFVr/yPzBH8m 8S4mRVzni2cmRI2iFAij7WbqhMBNV0OwpaTJnAY9CX7O+qrU4hcLkxAbDainYfSl9KqrMGQF/CUF/ Vw5ud+NsPwOTF5a9nHr/9ryJk+7/qo95yF9K0tsIVz/7bFH3V4Vk0nZwu/KbFd+BnPVY=; Received: from static.214.254.202.116.clients.your-server.de ([116.202.254.214] helo=ciao.gmane.io) by quimby with esmtps (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1k7WHi-0004fv-JI for ding@gnus.org; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 05:58:14 +0200 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1k7WHf-0003qI-Fo for ding@gnus.org; Mon, 17 Aug 2020 05:58:07 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: ding@gnus.org From: Wayne Harris Subject: Re: on a buffer performance test on GNU EMACS 28 Date: Mon, 17 Aug 2020 00:57:29 -0300 Message-ID: <86eeo57wly.fsf@protonmail.com> References: <861rk7xs1n.fsf@protonmail.com> <871rk6ijxu.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Cancel-Lock: sha1:HiiCeAX8hiIsjk8GaETd0KQrLME= List-ID: Precedence: bulk Eric Abrahamsen writes: > Wayne Harris writes: > >> On Windows, I said M-x run-python, then said >> >> for i in range(100000): print(i) >> >> on both GNU EMACS 28 and GNU EMACS 24. I timed the speed of the >> buffer to scroll up. I used my own phone's stop watch. I started out >> the slow one first, which was EMACS 24, only after it was running I >> started the clock, then I started GNU EMACS 28's code. The result was >> >> GNU EMACS 28 finishes in less than 8.00 seconds. GNU EMACS 24 >> finishes after 24.44 seconds. Incredible difference. I suppose this >> will make me upgrade to GNU EMACS 28. >> >> How do you explain this marvelous difference? Could there i386 versus >> i686 have anything to do this? I would doubt it. > > You probably want to send this to emacs.help or emacs.devel -- this > group is emacs.gnus.general, which is specifically for development work > on Emacs' Gnus newsreader and mail client. Here at Gnus we're still > waiting for our 3x speedup. :) This was an accident. I apologize. I thought I had written to USENET's gnu.emacs.help. Thanks for the kind reply!