[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: FW: [External] : Re: Native compilation by default?: Was [Re: stats
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
Re: FW: [External] : Re: Native compilation by default?: Was [Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp |
Date: |
Sun, 26 Feb 2023 19:31:51 +0200 |
> From: Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>
> Date: Sun, 26 Feb 2023 17:12:56 +0000
>
> But you also say "neither does the manual".
>
> To me, the Emacs manual is (and has long been)
> very clear about this. Node `Lisp Libraries'
> goes into it, pointing out explicitly which
> files (*.el or *.elc) get loaded (priority)
> by `load', `load-library', and `load-file'.
But none of that says anything about explicitly loading FOO.el.
> And that Emacs-manual text points to the more
> detailed text in the Elisp manual, node `How
> Programs Do Loading'.
Which again says nothing about explicitly loading FOO.el.
- Re: Native compilation by default? (was: Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp), (continued)
- Re: Native compilation by default?: Was [Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/02/22
- Re: Native compilation by default?: Was [Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp, Madhu, 2023/02/25
- Re: Native compilation by default?: Was [Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp, Stefan Monnier, 2023/02/25
- Re: Native compilation by default?: Was [Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/02/26
- FW: [External] : Re: Native compilation by default?: Was [Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp, Drew Adams, 2023/02/26
- Re: FW: [External] : Re: Native compilation by default?: Was [Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/02/26
- RE: FW: [External] : Re: Native compilation by default?: Was [Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp, Drew Adams, 2023/02/26
- Re: FW: [External] : Re: Native compilation by default?: Was [Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp,
Eli Zaretskii <=
- RE: FW: [External] : Re: Native compilation by default?: Was [Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp, Drew Adams, 2023/02/26
- Re: FW: [External] : Re: Native compilation by default?: Was [Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/02/26
- Re: FW: [External] : Re: Native compilation by default?: Was [Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp, Emanuel Berg, 2023/02/27
- Re: Native compilation by default?: Was [Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp, Emanuel Berg, 2023/02/27
- Re: Native compilation by default?: Was [Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp, Emanuel Berg, 2023/02/27
- Re: Native compilation by default?: Was [Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp, Madhu, 2023/02/27
- Re: Native compilation by default?: Was [Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp, Eli Zaretskii, 2023/02/26
- RE: [External] : Re: Native compilation by default?: Was [Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp, Drew Adams, 2023/02/26
- Re: stats say SBCL is 78 875 % faster than natively compiled Elisp, Jean Louis, 2023/02/19