[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: t and nil in pure memory?
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: t and nil in pure memory? |
Date: |
Fri, 13 Nov 2009 10:37:03 +0200 |
> From: Richard Stallman <address@hidden>
> CC: address@hidden, address@hidden
> Date: Thu, 12 Nov 2009 23:55:43 -0500
>
> I don't think this matters enough to bother: even if we consider GC
> too slow (and I don't think so), this is only 10% of it, so even
> reducing it to zero will give only a marginal speedup.
>
> Considering how many people run Emacs, I think even a 1% speedup
> in GC is worth the effort if it is not much effort.
No matter how many people use Emacs, the 1% speedup will still save
only 1% of the time for each one of them.
- Re: t and nil in pure memory?, (continued)
- Re: t and nil in pure memory?, Tom Tromey, 2009/11/18
- Re: t and nil in pure memory?, Ken Raeburn, 2009/11/22
- Re: t and nil in pure memory?, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2009/11/23
- Re: t and nil in pure memory?, Ken Raeburn, 2009/11/24
- Re: t and nil in pure memory?, Stefan Monnier, 2009/11/24
- Re: t and nil in pure memory?, Stefan Monnier, 2009/11/18
Re: t and nil in pure memory?, Eli Zaretskii, 2009/11/11
Re: t and nil in pure memory?, Richard Stallman, 2009/11/12
Re: t and nil in pure memory?, A. Soare, 2009/11/20