From xemacs-m  Wed Apr 23 11:00:50 1997
Received: from mailbox2.ucsd.edu (mailbox2.ucsd.edu [132.239.1.54])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA04256
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Wed, 23 Apr 1997 11:00:49 -0500 (CDT)
Received: from sdnp5.ucsd.edu (sdnp5.ucsd.edu [132.239.79.10]) by mailbox2.ucsd.edu (8.8.5/8.6.9) with SMTP id JAA23238 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Wed, 23 Apr 1997 09:00:48 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by sdnp5.ucsd.edu (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id JAA10987; Wed, 23 Apr 1997 09:02:06 -0700
To: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
Subject: Re: Goals for the packaging system
References: <vwm3esogoho.fsf@calico.cis.ohio-state.edu> <199704221159.NAA02757@daedalus.tnt.uni-hannover.de> <m22083rppo.fsf@altair.xemacs.org>
X-Face: "oX;zS#-JU$-,WKSzG.1gGE]x^cIg!hW.dq>.f6pzS^A+(k!T|M:}5{_%>Io<>L&{hO7W4cicOQ|>/lZ1G(m%7iaCf,6Qgk0%%Bz7b2-W3jd0m_UG\Y;?]}4s0O-U)uox>P3JN)9cm]O\@,vy2e{`3pb!"pqmRy3peB90*2L
Mail-Copies-To: never
Mime-Version: 1.0 (generated by tm-edit 7.106)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
From: David Moore <dmoore@ucsd.edu>
Date: 23 Apr 1997 09:02:05 -0700
In-Reply-To: Steven L Baur's message of 22 Apr 1997 09:23:47 -0700
Message-ID: <rvk9lt918h.fsf@sdnp5.ucsd.edu>
Lines: 14
X-Mailer: Gnus v5.4.45/XEmacs 20.1

Steven L Baur <steve@miranova.com> writes:

> Has anyone stopped to consider the fact that part of the slowness of
> XEmacs may be related to the number of symbols in the symbol table?

I have (well indirectly) and don't think that's the case.  Profiling
shows clear places where we are slow and could easily make some nice
gains, and none of it has to do with the number of loaded packages
cluttering the symbol name space.[1]

Footnotes: 
[1]  Modulo of course the potential GC and VM costs, which should be
attcked directly.

