X-Recipient: archive-cygwin AT delorie DOT com
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:subject:in-reply-to:to:cc:reply-to
	:message-id:references; q=dns; s=default; b=UAr04KncOqllAAw7aqMM
	RjjkBX9MXzfIs7OXW/IJmASF1hZpIKzXsBnGOd3lqEN2bGpar7R9aE11Zb4b7MD/
	cWR2DLzgzpKALeCao8jeemq1mT6t6tmrNIFiyfRWMKwg/u0oua1P+QF/kdIJ1Q7P
	RD+Z7icUIExi/QZKQo3PuH4=
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=sourceware.org; h=list-id
	:list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-archive:list-post
	:list-help:sender:date:from:subject:in-reply-to:to:cc:reply-to
	:message-id:references; s=default; bh=sghnGyJnuBHsMxEqX3YrBBWTAs
	E=; b=ap5THWLxQSLAUnrmKAZs6b3vXGOKSQiIwxBgmdBOsYMcMN4wD0g+793+0G
	8i/cz0UuteCS9Ei50kfkMo/VMexh3jT6D7YrJaGOJEkfhu7fZGNJR3HyNkD6iyUn
	Gq35SiG0/l4gGlcveg57zUJFE1VPUM2+ciPr1SgngoI5CGRp8=
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com; run by ezmlm
List-Id: <cygwin.cygwin.com>
List-Subscribe: <mailto:cygwin-subscribe AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Archive: <http://sourceware.org/ml/cygwin/>
List-Post: <mailto:cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>
List-Help: <mailto:cygwin-help AT cygwin DOT com>, <http://sourceware.org/ml/#faqs>
Sender: cygwin-owner AT cygwin DOT com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Delivered-To: mailing list cygwin AT cygwin DOT com
Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none
X-Virus-Found: No
X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=0.2 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,RCVD_IN_JMF_BL,SPF_SOFTFAIL autolearn=no version=3.3.2
X-HELO: mtaout28.012.net.il
Date: Sat, 18 Oct 2014 08:42:48 +0300
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT gnu DOT org>
Subject: Re: bug#18752: 24.3.94; Why is Cygwin Emacs 2x quicker than Windows Emacs?
In-reply-to: <86iojimmjg.fsf@example.com>
To: Fabrice Niessen <fni-news AT pirilampo DOT org>
Cc: 18752 AT debbugs DOT gnu DOT org, cygwin AT cygwin DOT com, dmoncayo AT gmail DOT com
Reply-to: Eli Zaretskii <eliz AT gnu DOT org>
Message-id: <83wq7ydjc7.fsf@gnu.org>
References: <86h9z2rb42 DOT fsf AT example DOT com> <83siim1z6h DOT fsf AT gnu DOT org> <86iojimmjg DOT fsf AT example DOT com>

> From: Fabrice Niessen <fni-news AT pirilampo DOT org>
> Cc: 18752 AT debbugs DOT gnu DOT org,  cygwin <cygwin AT cygwin DOT com>, dmoncayo AT gmail DOT com
> Date: Fri, 17 Oct 2014 23:08:51 +0200
> 
> > You also forgot to tell what compiler options were used for each
> > build.  E.g., if the Cygwin build is optimized, whereas the MinGW
> > build is not, the twofold speedup is expected (I generally see
> > a factor of 2.5 between an optimized and unoptimized build).
> 
> I have no idea how Cygwin Emacs gets compiled, nor Windows Emacs (done
> by Dani). Putting them in Cc.

As Ken points out, the variable system-configuration-options is the
way to tell.

Given that the Cygwin build is optimized, it suffices to show that the
MinGW one isn't, to explain the difference in speed.

--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple