From xemacs-m  Sun Jan 19 00:24:23 1997
Received: from crystal.WonderWorks.COM (crystal.WonderWorks.com [192.203.206.1])
          by xemacs.org (8.8.4/8.8.4) with ESMTP
	  id AAA09389 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Sun, 19 Jan 1997 00:24:21 -0600 (CST)
Received: by crystal.WonderWorks.COM 
	id QQbzcz12234; Sun, 19 Jan 1997 01:24:21 -0500 (EST)
Date: Sun, 19 Jan 1997 01:24:21 -0500 (EST)
Message-Id: <QQbzcz12234.199701190624@crystal.WonderWorks.COM>
From: Kyle Jones <kyle_jones@wonderworks.com>
To: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
Subject: Re: 19.15b90: slow status messages
In-Reply-To: <97Jan18.235358edt.10748(3)@jupiter.scs.Ryerson.CA>
References: <QQbzcq10256.199701190403@crystal.WonderWorks.COM>
	<97Jan18.235358edt.10748(3)@jupiter.scs.Ryerson.CA>

Dave Mason writes:
 > Kyle Jones writes:
 > > Trying to debug a problem, I ran this
 > > [...]
 > > I was stunned at how slowly it ran.  Try it.  I wonder how much
 > > faster VM would startup if I didn't print status messages.
 > 
 > My first intuition was the fact that it had to create a temp string
 > for the formatting... so I tried with a constant string, no i.  Hard
 > to say but it seemed almost exactly as slow, and the same amount of
 > GC.
 > 
 > Bleah!
 > 
 > Maybe if VM did status every 10 messages?

VM does status messages at a random interval, from 10 to 20
messages.  So I don't suppose it is slowing down very much.

