From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Jambunathan K Subject: Re: [RFC] Org version of the Org manual Date: Wed, 06 Mar 2013 15:48:57 +0530 Message-ID: <87ppzc96ge.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87ehfuonx6.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <87zjyhotvi.fsf@yagnesh.org> <8738w90wmq.fsf@Rainer.invalid> <87r4jt53ts.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <87ppzczzlt.fsf@Rainer.invalid> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:39027) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UDBRJ-0002H4-FP for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Mar 2013 05:19:18 -0500 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UDBRI-0000C1-3W for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Mar 2013 05:19:13 -0500 Received: from mail-pb0-f46.google.com ([209.85.160.46]:55354) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UDBRH-0000Bx-Tn for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 06 Mar 2013 05:19:12 -0500 Received: by mail-pb0-f46.google.com with SMTP id uo15so5772072pbc.5 for ; Wed, 06 Mar 2013 02:19:11 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87ppzczzlt.fsf@Rainer.invalid> (Achim Gratz's message of "Wed, 06 Mar 2013 09:44:46 +0100") List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: Achim Gratz Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Achim Gratz writes: > Bastien writes: >>> org-macro-replace-all 2 222.371024 111.185512 >> >> This one looks suspicious: if the function does what it says, >> why does it run twice? If we can spare 111 secs here, that's >> already an improvement. I'll have a look at some point but >> feel free to beat me on this! > > That interpretation makes assumptions that may not be valid. I'm not > even sure that you can rely on the number of calls (elp may miss some at > least), but especially not that each call takes the same time. So it is > perfectly possible that the first call took 222 seconds and the second > one just 0.371024=E2=80=A6 See (info "(elisp) Profiling") on a fairly recent Emacs. ,---- C-h n =3D> Lisp Changes in Emacs 24.3 | ** New sampling-based Elisp profiler. | Try M-x profiler-start, do some work, and then call M-x profiler-report. | When finished, use M-x profiler-stop. The sampling rate can be based on | CPU time or memory allocations. `---- > > The top entry for profiler btw is "called-interactively". How helpful. > > Regards, > Achim. --=20