From: Jesper Harder <harder@ifa.au.dk>
Subject: Speed of obarray vs. hash table
Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2004 03:53:50 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <m3hdy2ffi9.fsf@defun.localdomain> (raw)
I changed `nnrss-group-hashtb' to be a real hash table instead of an
obarray which made `nnrss-read-group-data' nearly twice as fast (and
causes less consing).
If this is generally true, then it might be worthwhile to make similar
changes other places in Gnus if someone feels like experimenting.
reply other threads:[~2004-02-08 2:53 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: [no followups] expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=m3hdy2ffi9.fsf@defun.localdomain \
--to=harder@ifa.au.dk \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).