From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dan Nicolaescu Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Unbearably slow editing in .h files Date: Thu, 03 Apr 2008 06:10:40 -0700 Message-ID: <200804031310.m33DAfB3009774@sallyv1.ics.uci.edu> References: <200801271954.m0RJsmBm003714@sallyv1.ics.uci.edu> <479DAC55.8070302@gmx.at> <200801300258.m0U2w9rr005169@sallyv1.ics.uci.edu> <47B9E0B1.1090908@gmx.at> <20080223224901.GB3476@muc.de> <47C0A376.8080105@gmx.at> <20080402220710.GC1283@muc.de> <200804022347.m32NlqS5010556@sallyv1.ics.uci.edu> <20080403091400.GA1937@muc.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1207228428 29842 80.91.229.12 (3 Apr 2008 13:13:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 3 Apr 2008 13:13:48 +0000 (UTC) Cc: martin rudalics , Stefan Monnier , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Alan Mackenzie Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Apr 03 15:14:10 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1JhPGP-0002WU-4S for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 03 Apr 2008 15:13:57 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JhPFm-0004HF-Hs for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 03 Apr 2008 09:13:18 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JhPFi-0004GF-6Q for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 03 Apr 2008 09:13:14 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1JhPFh-0004Fn-FO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 03 Apr 2008 09:13:13 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1JhPFh-0004Fd-Ar for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 03 Apr 2008 09:13:13 -0400 Original-Received: from sallyv1.ics.uci.edu ([128.195.1.109]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_3DES_EDE_CBC_SHA1:24) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1JhPFg-0005wp-Np for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 03 Apr 2008 09:13:13 -0400 X-ICS-MailScanner-Watermark: 1207833042.28967@77Ks5Zp75Pucs/dYWMSLnw Original-Received: from mothra.ics.uci.edu (mothra.ics.uci.edu [128.195.6.93]) by sallyv1.ics.uci.edu (8.13.7+Sun/8.13.7) with ESMTP id m33DAfB3009774; Thu, 3 Apr 2008 06:10:41 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <20080403091400.GA1937@muc.de> (Alan Mackenzie's message of "Thu, 3 Apr 2008 09:14:00 +0000") Original-Lines: 68 X-ICS-MailScanner: Found to be clean X-ICS-MailScanner-SpamCheck: not spam, SpamAssassin (score=-1.44, required 5, autolearn=disabled, ALL_TRUSTED -1.44) X-ICS-MailScanner-From: dann@mothra.ics.uci.edu X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:94256 Archived-At: Alan Mackenzie writes: > On Wed, Apr 02, 2008 at 04:47:52PM -0700, Dan Nicolaescu wrote: > > Alan Mackenzie writes: > > > > Hi, Martin and Stefan, > > > > On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 11:51:34PM +0100, martin rudalics wrote: > > > > Evening Alan, > > > > > > What is add-log-current-defun using c-beginning-of-defun for? > > > > > Visit lisp.h, go to the end of the buffer, and do > > > > > M-x RET c-beginning-of-defun RET > > > > > Convincing? > > > > I have just fixed this problem (I hope!) in both the Emacs-22 > > > branch and the trunk. Basically, the contorted functionality in > > > add-log.el has been superseded by optimised routines in cc-cmds.el. > > > > On my 1.2 GHz Athlon machine, C-x 4 a now takes around 4 seconds at > > > the end of lisp.h, in the trunk. It's somewhat faster in the > > > Emacs-22 branch, but I don't know why. > > > > I think this is fast enough. > > > Can it be faster? Might sound like a joke, but it's a serious > > question. > > Just to clarify, that 4 seconds is in the extreme case (lisp.h) that > brought the problem to light. In a typical case, the action is > "instantaneous". When finding (or failing to find) a function name, the > new implementation is more than an order of magnitude faster than the > old. For a macro name, it takes about as long as the old. > > > `diff-add-change-log-entries-other-window' uses this (calls it once per > > diff hunk), and it is nice to let it run on largish diff buffers to > > quickly produce a skeleton for a ChangeLog . > > Hey, I didn't know you could do this. Thanks for telling me! :-) > (Actually, until I looked at this bug report, I didn't realise you could > do C-x 4 a in an elisp or C file - I thought it would only work when done > in ChangeLog itself.) Note that `diff-add-change-log-entries-other-window' is C-x 4 A not C-x 4 a, it is the equivalent of: FOR each hunk in a diff DO C-x 4 a When used on a diff buffer with thousands of lines, it is a bit slow. > > Is the slowdown still caused by the fact that is hard to distinguish a > > K&R functions from variable declarations? > > Again, it's a massive speedup, not a slowdown. Isn't it? Sorry, I was referring to the fact slowdown cause by K&R checks, not your patch. > To the extent that it's still slower than it might be, yes it's the > K&R stuff making it slow. The function which takes time is > c-in-knr-argdecl (cc-engine.el, ~L6317). Actually, this function > gets called twice. It would take a lot of refactoring to make it > get called only once. What if it's not called at all? After all, the vast majority of the users never edit K&R. Just a thought...