[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: |
Sat, 14 Nov 2009 13:46:15 +0200 |
> From: Richard Stallman <address@hidden>
> CC: address@hidden, address@hidden
> Date: Sat, 14 Nov 2009 06:23:16 -0500
>
> No matter how many people use Emacs, the 1% speedup will still save
> only 1% of the time for each one of them.
>
> Sure, but even if it is only a small improvement for each person, it
> is still worth doing if it is easy. Suppose that this small speedup
> transforms "annoying" into "not annoying" for just one user in a
> thousand each day. That would mean that, each day, hundreds or thousands
> of people are happier.
But a 1% speedup will not transform "annoying" into "not annoying",
and thus will make no one happier.
- 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