From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#57245: 29.0.50; M-> in a large XML file (without long lines) is slow Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 15:46:18 +0300 Message-ID: <80291f13-2044-b8be-620d-8dee95a35e4a@yandex.ru> References: <18035574-1b50-62f4-7605-8cdb33204535@yandex.ru> <83tu6cdt7l.fsf@gnu.org> <913e0b46-7145-d39d-1fcd-bc17094e28f2@yandex.ru> <6688b0ad-54e1-4a59-e9b6-4cdc803a8359@yandex.ru> <4e2838b5-109e-7a27-0230-29dc6624b751@yandex.ru> <83bksjdru1.fsf@gnu.org> <83wnb7cbg7.fsf@gnu.org> <83tu6bcans.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="40554"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.9.1 Cc: 57245@debbugs.gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Aug 17 14:48:08 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1oOISt-000AOB-SO for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 17 Aug 2022 14:48:07 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44480 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oOISs-0007VZ-Bd for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 17 Aug 2022 08:48:06 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:51896) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oOIRq-0007UE-QJ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Aug 2022 08:47:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:59999) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oOIRq-0008Rw-Fj for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Aug 2022 08:47:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oOIRq-0000h6-AQ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 17 Aug 2022 08:47:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Dmitry Gutov Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 12:47:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 57245 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 57245-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B57245.16607403892628 (code B ref 57245); Wed, 17 Aug 2022 12:47:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 57245) by debbugs.gnu.org; 17 Aug 2022 12:46:29 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49748 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oOIRJ-0000gK-3l for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 17 Aug 2022 08:46:29 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-wr1-f49.google.com ([209.85.221.49]:39588) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oOIRH-0000g6-O8 for 57245@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 17 Aug 2022 08:46:28 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-wr1-f49.google.com with SMTP id r16so6865222wrm.6 for <57245@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 17 Aug 2022 05:46:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :sender:from:to:cc; bh=tXVBTT8nNha28pPmVm6YXYDFBKx8BWPg2gcDVh1fLPE=; b=RzTdzyfkxjpVrBTNCz05rLKO3lsyVlOkNvH4ucXQ4JXmN4gk8I86af+njQgeS2QNCA L9P1VYot6TAACo30e+CJvPE3SXdgv8jg54iDN3pWjF6XDRyKhlIgWdhOIGL7QHVcVkYu Xus2WYFRCqyM6/EfFjwBWLnX4yGV2M5paOQsZhoGUE1CJ9I16+jO6Gc0r7YmM89ZijDC vDY8c+qEicbNxHXRcja5gct7IyYHXNvEacNUcZhOiV/h3mXvT020Fvt154X6VEUm+B0+ ZfvbZR4ibLnWcUX6OrKNFcG7UvNE5D4LfzPyL/4aig0cC98loQHR8VpxvEepyuuPWEcL LAdA== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=content-transfer-encoding:in-reply-to:from:references:cc:to :content-language:subject:user-agent:mime-version:date:message-id :sender:x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc; bh=tXVBTT8nNha28pPmVm6YXYDFBKx8BWPg2gcDVh1fLPE=; b=hyprnzmyqrqBUnrikTtp8gKV4yGJGQB351lC6A2AINwQpJD468iYtmbFUlWDHIjJJd IXMKpeaC0byuOmGwL1AzPniSFbvGobnzc+wS/xAaKmbc4aux279bclWgpnZMWOAayypd TyW3ssRvBgiLEfgbdqkS4JlGM3Ig09h+2Ril+CGUNU2CwwiRiKEzakHlc/oa+W59F+5V js8UpkADcbPkGPzFNskgqriIw3ekXDpHcJv0LPiEAmsVVcepQBBBDKGUBkzI0bXeaRra fZb6MSsRaXhT7nzG+Hng6z2U2atC9Vp9Kd8Btkc29qOiXmSEHrP4RKpPtiX4Fgr+42hM oevA== X-Gm-Message-State: ACgBeo27eTxFf8aLiX3lABFHfs84fibozt8eHY9gsIma5/9C/gCRQCpQ mRmj2pWBheVuFHEX0qXHXs4= X-Google-Smtp-Source: AA6agR7ofXNIxu4+UyR4/BvtRLaGrNe98Zpp1OJkSNAn0g9avb/aS73sU9HocPDvwNu+vO/hLYBtdw== X-Received: by 2002:a05:6000:3c1:b0:225:27bc:3dc8 with SMTP id b1-20020a05600003c100b0022527bc3dc8mr1180429wrg.207.1660740381787; Wed, 17 Aug 2022 05:46:21 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from [192.168.0.6] ([46.251.119.176]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id j20-20020a05600c191400b003a5c1e916c8sm8274746wmq.1.2022.08.17.05.46.19 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Wed, 17 Aug 2022 05:46:20 -0700 (PDT) Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <83tu6bcans.fsf@gnu.org> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:240071 Archived-At: On 17.08.2022 15:33, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2022 15:30:22 +0300 >> Cc:57245@debbugs.gnu.org,monnier@iro.umontreal.ca >> From: Dmitry Gutov >> >> > Because if it is, then what does this have to do with >> > the issue of nXML not being scalable enough? >> >> Narrowing around font-lock shouldn't be conditioned on the presence of >> long lines. It either should be done unconditionally (with larger >> radius, I guess), or not at all. > Yes, you already said that, and I don't agree (and explained why). > Now, can we please agree to disagree and move on? I don't think you explained that, no. If you're referring to the previous discussions, this [bug report] is the first time I have put forward this particular suggestion. So you couldn't have addressed it before that.