Re: Speed difference in Gnus

[Uwe Brauer <oub@mat.ucm.es>]

>>>>> "David" == David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
   >> 
   >>>>>>>> "David" == David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
   >>> 
   David> M-x elp-results RET
   >>> 
   >>> Thanks, this function also exists in xemacs (and I did not know
   >>> about it), in any case the information is very aehm spare:
   >> 
   >> You should probably also instrument the `nnml', `imap', `mm' and `mml'
   >> packages (and maybe some more depending on which operation you're
   >> benchmarking -- I don't recall).


   David> And it helps to run the test first before instrumenting it: that way
   David> not only the autoloads get instrumented.

Ok, thanks, I think now more or less I know how to proceed. As I said
before the situation is sort of strange: for a certain amount of msg,
say n, both emacsen are almost equal, gnu emacs a little faster, once
the number of msg > n, then xemacs got stacked.

I should add, that the information of the elp packages is detailed the
profile-command of xemacs gives far more information. I don't know how
important profiling is for emacs, but may that pkg could be ported?