[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#65250: 30.0.50; "C-h f" is much slower on the master branch
From: |
Andrea Corallo |
Subject: |
bug#65250: 30.0.50; "C-h f" is much slower on the master branch |
Date: |
Mon, 14 Aug 2023 10:51:46 -0400 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) |
Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>> Cc: 65250@debbugs.gnu.org
>> Date: Mon, 14 Aug 2023 15:19:16 +0300
>> From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
>>
>> 'configure -C --prefix=/d/usr --with-wide-int
>> --enable-checking=yes,glyphs 'CFLAGS=-O0 -gdwarf-4 -g3''
>>
>> Perhaps --enable-checking makes the difference?
>>
>> If even that doesn't show the problem, just time the above and compare
>> with Emacs 29: it's possible that the command is much faster on your
>> system, but the question is it significantly slower than Emacs 29?
>
> It sounds like the problem is the packages that Emacs needs to load
> when comp-function-type-spec is called. If I set force-load-messages
> to t before invoking "C-h f", I see this in the *Messages* buffer:
>
> Loading help-fns...
> Loading cl-lib...
> Loading cl-loaddefs...done
> Loading cl-lib...done
> Loading help-mode...done
> Loading radix-tree...done
> Loading help-fns...done
> Loading thingatpt...done
> Loading dictionary...
> Loading dictionary-connection...done
> Loading external-completion...done
> Loading dictionary...done
> Loading lisp/emacs-lisp/comp.el (source)...
> Loading bytecomp...done
> Loading cl-extra...done
> Loading cl-macs...
> Loading gv...done
> Loading cl-macs...done
> Loading cl-seq...done
> Loading rx...done
> Loading subr-x...done
> Loading warnings...
> Loading icons...done
> Loading warnings...done
> Loading lisp/emacs-lisp/comp-cstr.el (source)...
> Loading pcase...done
> Loading lisp/emacs-lisp/comp-cstr.el (source)...done
> Loading derived...done
> Loading lisp/emacs-lisp/comp.el (source)...done
> Loading shortdoc...
> Loading text-property-search...done
> Loading shortdoc...done
>
> Note the loading of comp.el and comp-cstr.el -- we load their source
> files, not the *.elc files. That's because in a build without native
> compilation these two files are not byte-compiled. I think loading of
> these files, especially of comp.el, in source form is what slows down
> the command.
Maybe, comp-cstr.el might have even a bigger part.
> I'm guessing your build was with native compilation?
Yes, I was experimenting just now (and failing to reproduce) with
CFLAGS='-O0 -gdwarf-4 -g3' ./configure --without-x
--with-native-compilation=yes --prefix='/home/andcor03'
--enable-checking=yes,glyphs --with-wide-int
> Because in such
> a build the "C-h f" command is indeed fast, especially after the
> requisite *.el files are all native-compiled (i.e. starting from the
> second Emacs invocation after the build).
Ah right! now it's all clear!
> So I think the patch I presented in my original report is exactly what
> is needed here: the problem only happens in builds without
> native-compilation, and in that case there's no reason whatsoever to
> call comp-function-type-spec. (And builds from a release tarball will
> not see that problem, since the tarball comes with byte-compiled
> comp.el and comp-cstr.el.)
>
> Do you agree?
I certainly do. Thanks for the anylysis and the patch!
Andrea
- bug#65250: 30.0.50; "C-h f" is much slower on the master branch, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/08/12
- bug#65250: 30.0.50; "C-h f" is much slower on the master branch, Andrea Corallo, 2023/08/12
- bug#65250: 30.0.50; "C-h f" is much slower on the master branch, Andrea Corallo, 2023/08/14
- bug#65250: 30.0.50; "C-h f" is much slower on the master branch, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/08/14
- bug#65250: 30.0.50; "C-h f" is much slower on the master branch, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/08/14
- bug#65250: 30.0.50; "C-h f" is much slower on the master branch,
Andrea Corallo <=
- bug#65250: 30.0.50; "C-h f" is much slower on the master branch, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/08/14
- bug#65250: 30.0.50; "C-h f" is much slower on the master branch, Andrea Corallo, 2023/08/14
- bug#65250: 30.0.50; "C-h f" is much slower on the master branch, Andrea Corallo, 2023/08/14
- bug#65250: 30.0.50; "C-h f" is much slower on the master branch, Andrea Corallo, 2023/08/16
- bug#65250: 30.0.50; "C-h f" is much slower on the master branch, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/08/16
- bug#65250: 30.0.50; "C-h f" is much slower on the master branch, Andrea Corallo, 2023/08/16
- bug#65250: 30.0.50; "C-h f" is much slower on the master branch, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/08/16