Re: Benchmarking XEmacs (was Re: Beware of modules.)
"Stephen J. Turnbull" <turnbull(a)sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> writes:
I can't perceive the difference between Mule and no-Mule for most
of
the fundamental editing and redisplay operations even on an ancient
Sparc ELC or a 80486/50MHz (both are XEmacs 20.4, though), including
stuff like sort-lines. Once a Japanese font is loaded, changing to
that font is no slower in XEmacs than in a kterm, perceptually. If
Hrvoje can perceive those differences as a half-order of magnitude,
he's quick.
I use non-Mule XEmacs every day. As soon as I compile with Mule to
test it, stuff like `M-x gnus' or editing tasks or whatever become
incredibly slow. Perhaps there is another explanation for that, but I
can't think of any.