On Sun, Jul 10, 2016 at 7:28 PM Eli Zaretskii <
eliz@gnu.org> wrote:
> I see. Then I think we should figure out why it's become more expensive
> in Emacs 25 (if that is indeed the case).
It isn't yet clear that this is what happened. Can someone time this
in both versions compiled with the same optimization options?
I’m not thinking that this is the case anymore… at least, I don’t have any evidence to point to that. I still don’t know exactly what state emacs has to be in for it to be super painfully slow. The fix/workaround, while it helped, only really shaved off 4ms or so from a typometer avg, which is significant, but it wasn’t as bad as I had seen it in the slow case, so I’m probably missing something in the repro.
Any way, I’m happy to consider this bug closed if you all are, though I think that adding additional caveats to the docs would be wonderful, this is a particularly nasty/surprising thing.
Thank you all for your help.