Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.lang.lisp > #61665
| From | Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.lang.lisp |
| Subject | Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions |
| Date | 2026-09-20 16:18 -0700 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <87ik3zik9z.fsf@nightsong.com> (permalink) |
| References | (16 earlier) <27310.37495.390148.32696@parhasard.net> <118n0hq$2klsb$2@dont-email.me> <27311.2978.832624.294330@parhasard.net> <87qzioixej.fsf@nightsong.com> <27312.20006.551518.782946@parhasard.net> |
Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net> writes: > My understanding was that he felt it [dynamic scope] was faster, but I > don’t care to argue. See here: https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/emacs-paper.html#SEC18 Even with byte compilation, I'd have to see benchmarks to believe that the speed difference between dynamic and lexical binding in Emacs is significant, especially with a small amount of coding attention, such as using LET outside rather than inside a tight loop if you can. > Philosophies can be wrong. RMS is a pretty sharp Lisper and while anyone can be wrong about things, I tend to want a pretty good reason to think I'm not the one who's wrong. In the previous section of that paper (SEC17) though, he does say, It is not necessary for dynamic scope to be the only scope rule provided, just useful for it to be available. That roughly fits the situation in CL, Scheme, and modern-day Emacs Lisp.
Back to comp.lang.lisp | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
Malicious Computer Architecture (was: Re: Prioritize Performance over Correctness) Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-03 19:23 +0800
Re: Malicious Computer Architecture (was: Re: Prioritize Performance over Correctness) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-08-03 14:29 +0000
Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Kragen Javier Sitaker <kragen@canonical.org> - 2026-09-03 14:26 -0300
Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...] (Was: Malicious Computer Architecture) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-03 18:10 +0200
But how can you deploy. when its ROM? (Was: Johnny Depp prevention [Windows 11 etc...]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-03 18:15 +0200
GPU Elasticity: Collective Communications Libraries (Was: But how can you deploy. when its ROM?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-07 14:37 +0200
What are Flits and Phits? [Network on a Chip] (Re: GPU Elasticity: Collective Communications Libraries) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-07 18:07 +0200
Cristallina: Thank you for the Beam (Re: What are Flits and Phits? [Network on a Chip]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-09 21:22 +0200
Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-18 16:26 +0200
How to shoot yourself in the foot (Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-18 16:50 +0200
Re: How to shoot yourself in the foot (Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-19 03:24 +0800
Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-19 03:21 +0800
Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net> - 2026-08-18 21:13 +0100
Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-08-18 22:49 +0000
Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-19 08:32 +0800
Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Anthk GM <anthk@disroot.org> - 2026-09-15 17:10 +0000
Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-15 18:08 +0000
You hear some noises in the distance (Was: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-09-15 20:21 +0200
Re: You hear some noises in the distance (Was: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog?) scott@slp53.sl.home (Scott Lurndal) - 2026-09-15 20:05 +0000
Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2026-08-21 02:08 -0400
Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-21 15:25 +0800
Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] George Neuner <gneuner2@comcast.net> - 2026-08-21 16:28 -0400
Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog? [Prolog Education Group] Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-19 08:27 +0800
William A. Howard solved all his 99 problems (Re: Loderunner Enemy AI better than SWI-Prolog?) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-23 01:48 +0200
The Mac Neo is a Budget Monster [GPU Channels] (Re: What are Flits and Phits? [Network on a Chip]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-11 16:27 +0200
The luminaries of duct-tape engineering [Sweeney and Torvald] (Was: The Mac Neo is a Budget Monster [GPU Channels]) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-11 16:51 +0200
Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net> - 2026-08-03 19:51 +0100
Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-05 00:22 +0800
Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Richard Harnden <richard.nospam@gmail.invalid> - 2026-08-04 19:10 +0100
Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-08-06 21:55 +0000
Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-07 06:31 +0800
Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net> - 2026-08-06 23:01 +0100
Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-07 06:45 +0800
Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Niocláisín Cóilín de Ghlostéir <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-08-04 18:13 +0000
Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-05 03:48 +0800
Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Niocláisín Cóilín de Ghlostéir <thanks-to@Taf.com> - 2026-08-04 22:01 +0000
Re: Malicious Computer Architecture Johann 'Myrkraverk' Oskarsson <johann@myrkraverk.invalid> - 2026-08-05 06:25 +0800
GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) Kragen Javier Sitaker <kragen@canonical.org> - 2026-09-03 14:37 -0300
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) Madhu <enometh@meer.net> - 2026-09-04 08:36 +0530
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) Kragen Javier Sitaker <kragen@canonical.org> - 2026-09-15 12:19 -0300
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) Madhu <enometh@meer.net> - 2026-09-17 12:17 +0530
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-17 21:12 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-09-18 09:59 -0400
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-18 22:00 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-09-18 10:12 -0400
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-18 22:01 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) steve g <Sgonedes1977@gmail.com> - 2026-10-05 19:30 -0400
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-10-05 23:50 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) tfb <tfb@work.it.out> - 2026-10-06 05:11 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net> - 2026-09-19 14:47 +0100
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-19 21:58 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net> - 2026-09-19 23:24 +0100
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2026-09-19 17:23 -0700
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-09-20 03:05 -0400
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-09-22 18:20 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net> - 2026-09-20 22:20 +0100
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2026-09-20 16:18 -0700
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca> - 2026-09-21 12:56 -0400
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Madhu <enometh@meer.net> - 2026-09-22 12:22 +0530
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2026-09-22 10:15 -0700
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Madhu <enometh@meer.net> - 2026-09-23 07:33 +0530
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net> - 2026-09-23 07:22 +0100
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2026-09-24 03:06 -0700
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2026-09-26 04:45 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Madhu <enometh@meer.net> - 2026-09-27 16:24 +0530
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Paul Rubin <no.email@nospam.invalid> - 2026-09-27 15:02 -0700
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Madhu <enometh@meer.net> - 2026-09-28 10:53 +0530
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions steve g <Sgonedes1977@gmail.com> - 2026-10-05 19:47 -0400
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Anton Antimo <anton@safunu.org> - 2026-09-24 10:25 -0300
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions steve g <Sgonedes1977@gmail.com> - 2026-10-05 19:49 -0400
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Lars Brinkhoff <lars.spam@nocrew.org> - 2026-09-23 13:59 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-09-22 18:22 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions tfb <tfb@work.it.out> - 2026-09-24 20:01 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-09-24 20:55 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions steve g <Sgonedes1977@gmail.com> - 2026-10-05 19:41 -0400
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-21 00:18 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-09-21 19:06 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-09-22 00:42 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-09-22 18:26 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions antispam@fricas.org (Waldek Hebisch) - 2026-09-25 21:54 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions steve g <Sgonedes1977@gmail.com> - 2026-10-05 20:13 -0400
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-09-22 17:51 +0000
Re: GNU Emacs native compiled functions (was Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) Kaz Kylheku <046-301-5902@kylheku.com> - 2026-09-22 18:02 +0000
A Case for Impurity: The Applied Pi Calculus (Re: Malicious Computer Architecture) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-04 14:58 +0200
The Sandcastle of Paul Taraus Interactors (Re: A Case for Impurity: The Applied Pi Calculus) Mild Shock <janburse@fastmail.fm> - 2026-08-04 15:10 +0200
csiph-web