From xemacs-m  Sat Feb  8 20:40:00 1997
Received: from martigny.ai.mit.edu (martigny.ai.mit.edu [18.43.0.152])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id UAA16826
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Sat, 8 Feb 1997 20:40:00 -0600 (CST)
Received: by martigny.ai.mit.edu
	(1.40.112.8/16.2) id AA208025984; Sat, 8 Feb 1997 21:39:44 -0500
Date: Sat, 8 Feb 1997 21:39:44 -0500
Message-Id: <199702090239.AA208025984@martigny.ai.mit.edu>
From: Bill Dubuque <wgd@martigny.ai.mit.edu>
To: kyle_jones@wonderworks.com
Cc: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
In-Reply-To: <QQccby20538.199702090232@crystal.WonderWorks.COM> (message from
	Kyle Jones on Sat, 8 Feb 1997 21:32:11 -0500 (EST))
Subject: Re: wot i need


: Date: Sat, 8 Feb 1997 21:32:11 -0500 (EST)
: From: Kyle Jones <kyle_jones@wonderworks.com>
: 
: Bill Dubuque writes:
: > [...]
: > I tried Kyle's test in 19.11 and 19.12b25 and 19.11 is about the
: > same speed as FSF 19.28, but 19.12b25 is about twice as slow.
: 
: This matches my own memory of that development period.  19.11 did
: many things at roughly equal speed as the FSF Emacses of the
: period, but 19.12 was dramatically slower.

I took a quick look at the QUIT code and it is indeed changed between
19.11 and 19.12, e.g. since 19.12 introduced devices, QUIT has to 
iterate over each device.

I can't image what else could account for the speed difference
(except some interrupts firing), so you may want to double 
check that your disabling of QUIT actually took effect, e.g.
ensure that you can break out of the loop via C-G.

-Bill

