From xemacs-m  Sun Feb  9 11:05:23 1997
Received: from xemacs.cs.uiuc.edu (localhost [127.0.0.1])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA04928;
	Sun, 9 Feb 1997 11:05:20 -0600 (CST)
Message-Id: <199702091705.LAA04928@xemacs.org>
To: Bill Dubuque <wgd@martigny.ai.mit.edu>
cc: kyle_jones@wonderworks.com, xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
Subject: Re: wot i need 
In-reply-to: Your message of "Sun, 09 Feb 1997 11:59:43 EST."
             <199702091659.AA299467589@martigny.ai.mit.edu> 
Date: Sun, 09 Feb 1997 11:05:16 -0600
From: Chuck Thompson <cthomp@xemacs.org>

    Bill> But I think my twice-as-fast 19.11 also was compiled with
    Bill> debugging, although I don't recall for sure.

It can't be.  There wasn't much extra debugging code in 19.11.  Ben
and I added most of it during the 19.12 development cycle.


    Bill> What are all the build options that greatly affect
    Bill> performance?

--error-checking=all which also sets --debug=yes


    Bill> Are the build options recorded somewhere?

Only in the config.status file in the build tree.


    Bill> Can one deduce these options from the image size?  My 19.11
    Bill> image is 4.55M, and the 19.12b25 is 5.41M.

Image size between different versions won't tell you anything about
what was built in.  It won't even tell you much between different
builds of the same version especially from 19.12 on up since there are
so many different combinations of flags that can be turned on and
off.  In any case the extra error checking code adds very little in
the way of size.  It is where the code is turned on that causes the
performance hits.



			-Chuck

