[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: In support of guile-emacs
From: |
Alan Mackenzie |
Subject: |
Re: In support of guile-emacs |
Date: |
Mon, 19 Oct 2015 17:19:09 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.23 (2014-03-12) |
Hello, Taylan.
On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 06:56:47PM +0200, Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer wrote:
> Alan Mackenzie <address@hidden> writes:
> > Hello, Daniel.
> > On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 07:14:55AM -0700, Daniel Colascione wrote:
> >> On 10/19/2015 03:24 AM, Alan Mackenzie wrote:
> >> > Hello, Xue.
> >> > On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 09:07:59AM +0800, Xue Fuqiao wrote:
> >> >> guile-emacs replaces Emacs's own Emacs Lisp engine with Guile's (without
> >> >> breaking backward compatibility). So:
> >> >> * Emacs Lisp will execute faster (Guile VM bytecode is more efficient)
> >> > Just as a matter of interest, approximately how much faster is Guile
> >> > bytecode than Emacs bytecode? Are we talking about 10%, 20%, 50%, a
> >> > factor of 2, or even higher?
> >> > If that speed increase was significant, it might be worth incorporating
> >> > Guile's bytecode into Emacs just for that reason, regardless of any of
> >> > the other stuff.
> >> Or simply making completely independent and custom-tailored improvements
> >> to the Emacs bytecode compiler and interpreter itself. There's no reason
> >> to imagine that the only way to improve performance there is to move to
> >> a completely different runtime.
> > Indeed not. Lessons could be learnt from Guile, perhaps. But how much
> > faster is Guile bytecode?
> For the record, the unreleased Guile 2.2 uses a register VM (instead of
> a stack VM), and has a different intermediate language on which more
> optimization is done. There's prospect for native code compilation too
> for the future, from what I gather. So Guile's performance isn't
> exactly fixed at its current state, and improvements are happening at a
> pretty impressive rate.
A true politician's (non-)answer. ;-)
Is the Guile VM, in fact, faster than the Emacs byte interpreter? Who's
done any measurements? Surely the speed advantage/disadvantage of the
Guile VM will depend, possibly a lot, on what program is being tested,
but has anybody actually done any actual benchmarking?
> Taylan
--
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).
- In support of guile-emacs, Christopher Allan Webber, 2015/10/18
- Re: In support of guile-emacs, Artur Malabarba, 2015/10/18
- Re: In support of guile-emacs, Xue Fuqiao, 2015/10/18
- Re: In support of guile-emacs, Alan Mackenzie, 2015/10/19
- Re: In support of guile-emacs, David Kastrup, 2015/10/19
- Re: In support of guile-emacs, Daniel Colascione, 2015/10/19
- Re: In support of guile-emacs, Alan Mackenzie, 2015/10/19
- Re: In support of guile-emacs, Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer, 2015/10/19
- Re: In support of guile-emacs,
Alan Mackenzie <=
- Re: In support of guile-emacs, Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer, 2015/10/19
- Re: In support of guile-emacs, Dmitry Gutov, 2015/10/19
- Re: In support of guile-emacs, Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer, 2015/10/19
- Re: In support of guile-emacs, Alan Mackenzie, 2015/10/19
- Re: In support of guile-emacs, Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer, 2015/10/19
- Re: In support of guile-emacs, Alan Mackenzie, 2015/10/20
- Re: In support of guile-emacs, Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer, 2015/10/20
- Re: In support of guile-emacs, John Wiegley, 2015/10/20
- Re: In support of guile-emacs, Taylan Ulrich Bayırlı/Kammer, 2015/10/21
- Re: In support of guile-emacs, Alan Mackenzie, 2015/10/21