Subject: bug#30491: 26.0; (elisp) `Profiling'

From: Eli Zaretskii <[email-masked]>
Date: Sat, 17 Feb 2018 12:06:06 +0200

> Date: Fri, 16 Feb 2018 10:11:59 -0800 (PST)
> From: Drew Adams <[email-masked]>
> 
> 1. "how much resource" is not good English.  How much of a given
>    resource or how many resources, not how much resource.  "Resource" is
>    a countable noun.
> 
> 2. "See the functions 'benchmark-run' and 'benchmark-run-compiled'".
>    Those are macros, not functions.  And it should probably mention
>    command `benchmark'.

I fixed those.

> 3. The node should say something about library `elp', or it should not
>    mention it.  The approach should be similar to what is said about
>    library `benchmark.el', at a minimum.

Done.

> 4. A simple example of using the profiler commands would be welcome.

Not sure what example you had in mind.  The text mentions 3 profiler
commands to invoke, and describes the resulting profile.  What would
the example include, besides just "M-x profile-start" etc., which
sounds redundant?

> Also, some brief comparison of profile, elp, and benchmark could be helpful: what are their particular purposes, strengths, etc.

I think this was already clear from the text: e.g., benchmark only
measures the total execution time of a form, it doesn't produce any
insights on the distribution of that time between the form's
components.  I added more text to make some differences more clear.

Thanks.