From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Drew Adams" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: Long lines and bidi Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 09:55:36 -0800 Message-ID: <0E804F1CAE9D4964900AB83DCE473016@us.oracle.com> References: <877gmp5a04.fsf@ed.ac.uk> <83vca89izh.fsf@gnu.org><5110906D.7020406@yandex.ru> <83fw1aac3d.fsf@gnu.org><51120360.4060104@yandex.ru><51127363.5030203@yandex.ru> <834nhp9u9j.fsf@gnu.org><5114FEBB.8020201@yandex.ru> <838v6y99wk.fsf@gnu.org><836222983u.fsf@gnu.org> <51152A00.6070101@yandex.ru><83y5ey7npl.fsf@gnu.org> <5115C3BC.8020203@cs.ucla.edu><83txpl7u3w.fsf@gnu.org> <5116113D.5070707@cs.ucla.edu><83mwvd7qlx.fsf@gnu.org> <83r4ko5cpv.fsf@gnu.org> <83bobq6a8n.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1360605351 14498 80.91.229.3 (11 Feb 2013 17:55:51 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2013 17:55:51 +0000 (UTC) Cc: eggert@cs.ucla.edu, dmantipov@yandex.ru To: "'Eli Zaretskii'" , , "'Stefan Monnier'" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 11 18:56:11 2013 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1U4xbt-0000So-AX for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 18:56:09 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40583 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U4xba-0000TI-5q for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 12:55:50 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:45199) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U4xbW-0000L6-I6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 12:55:47 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U4xbV-0007b0-Iv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 12:55:46 -0500 Original-Received: from aserp1040.oracle.com ([141.146.126.69]:20980) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1U4xbS-0007Zr-Ft; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 12:55:42 -0500 Original-Received: from ucsinet22.oracle.com (ucsinet22.oracle.com [156.151.31.94]) by aserp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.1) with ESMTP id r1BHtc8b006137 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK); Mon, 11 Feb 2013 17:55:40 GMT Original-Received: from acsmt357.oracle.com (acsmt357.oracle.com [141.146.40.157]) by ucsinet22.oracle.com (8.14.4+Sun/8.14.4) with ESMTP id r1BHtbr2029161 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Mon, 11 Feb 2013 17:55:38 GMT Original-Received: from abhmt115.oracle.com (abhmt115.oracle.com [141.146.116.67]) by acsmt357.oracle.com (8.12.11.20060308/8.12.11) with ESMTP id r1BHta6d005351; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 11:55:37 -0600 Original-Received: from dradamslap1 (/130.35.178.8) by default (Oracle Beehive Gateway v4.0) with ESMTP ; Mon, 11 Feb 2013 09:55:36 -0800 X-Mailer: Microsoft Office Outlook 11 In-Reply-To: <83bobq6a8n.fsf@gnu.org> Thread-Index: Ac4Ie7+rC95C3cNxQwuR0ZRswI4KMQAA894Q X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.6157 X-Source-IP: ucsinet22.oracle.com [156.151.31.94] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] X-Received-From: 141.146.126.69 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:156964 Archived-At: > Turning on the newline cache speeds up these searches for a newline by > a factor of 2, which is not too spectacular, but not negligible. Any > objections to turning on that caching by default in all buffers? I only followed some of all that you wrote, and I haven't followed the thread. But a question: You do not mention any added cost, AFAICT (but again, I did not follow in detail). Is the caching relevant (helpful) regardless of the value of truncate-lines or whether visual-line-mode etc. is on? IOW, does it make sense for many common configurations or just for some particular configs? If it is not particularly advantageous for some common configs, does it have a cost that would suggest it should not be done in those configs, or is it pretty much without a downside? What about "for all buffers"? Does it make sense also for buffers such as Dired and Info, which have relatively short line lengths? If there is no extra cost or other drawback then such considerations probably do not matter, of course.