bug#57079: 29.0.50; Performance of seq-uniq is not very good

[Lars Ingebrigtsen]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> delete-dups is destructive.  You can copy the list first, of course, but
>> seq-uniq should be much faster than it is.
>
> How much faster?  Using copy-sequence and delete-dups is 7 times
> faster here than seq-uniq and twice faster than
> gnus-delete-duplicates.

I didn't claim that seq-uniq will be faster than copy + delete-dups; I
just said that it's unnecessarily slow.