[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#58950: [PATCH] * lisp/subr.el (buffer-match-p): Optimise performance
From: |
Mattias Engdegård |
Subject: |
bug#58950: [PATCH] * lisp/subr.el (buffer-match-p): Optimise performance |
Date: |
Thu, 5 Jan 2023 11:31:08 +0100 |
5 jan. 2023 kl. 05.31 skrev Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>:
> I don't much like the kind of mini-language we invented for
> `buffer-match-p`. I'd prefer we just used plain old ELisp for that.
Yes, I sort of wondered whether we were going full Greenspun here. We haven't
added many embedded languages into our embedded language lately.
The usual DSL worthiness criteria:
- more expressive than plain code for the domain
- potential for significantly better performance
- better error-checking, statically or dynamically
- structured editing
etc, don't really seem to be met here but I'm not deeply familiar with the
problem and perhaps the author could make a better case for it.
- bug#58950: [PATCH] * lisp/subr.el (buffer-match-p): Optimise performance, Dmitry Gutov, 2023/01/04
- bug#58950: [PATCH] * lisp/subr.el (buffer-match-p): Optimise performance, Stefan Monnier, 2023/01/04
- bug#58950: [PATCH] * lisp/subr.el (buffer-match-p): Optimise performance,
Mattias Engdegård <=
- bug#58950: [PATCH] * lisp/subr.el (buffer-match-p): Optimise performance, Dmitry Gutov, 2023/01/05
- bug#58950: [PATCH] * lisp/subr.el (buffer-match-p): Optimise performance, Mattias Engdegård, 2023/01/06
- bug#58950: [PATCH] * lisp/subr.el (buffer-match-p): Optimise performance, Dmitry Gutov, 2023/01/06
- bug#58950: [PATCH] * lisp/subr.el (buffer-match-p): Optimise performance, Mattias Engdegård, 2023/01/07
- bug#58950: [PATCH] * lisp/subr.el (buffer-match-p): Optimise performance, Dmitry Gutov, 2023/01/08
- bug#58950: [PATCH] * lisp/subr.el (buffer-match-p): Optimise performance, Stefan Monnier, 2023/01/09
bug#58950: [PATCH] * lisp/subr.el (buffer-match-p): Optimise performance, Dmitry Gutov, 2023/01/05