From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jason Rumney Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Assertion failes in w32uniscribe.c Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2008 12:03:11 +0100 Message-ID: <47F9FF6F.3020900@gnu.org> References: <47F4F272.8050204@gnu.org> <47F5E34B.9040207@gnu.org> <47F602F6.2050309@gnu.org> <47F823FD.6050908@gnu.org> <47F8D363.9030701@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1207566234 12395 80.91.229.12 (7 Apr 2008 11:03:54 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 7 Apr 2008 11:03:54 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Emacs Devel To: Juanma Barranquero Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Apr 07 13:04:26 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 1Jip99-0003ih-OB for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Apr 2008 13:04:20 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Jip8W-0001Zc-PD for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Apr 2008 07:03:40 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Jip8N-0001Ta-55 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Apr 2008 07:03:31 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Jip8L-0001SD-Bv for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Apr 2008 07:03:30 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Jip8L-0001S4-5h for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Apr 2008 07:03:29 -0400 Original-Received: from mk-outboundfilter-4.mail.uk.tiscali.com ([212.74.114.32]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Jip8K-0004Mn-3o for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Apr 2008 07:03:28 -0400 Original-X-Trace: 53417947/mk-outboundfilter-2.mail.uk.tiscali.com/F2S/$ACCEPTED/freedom2Surf-customers/83.67.23.108 X-SBRS: None X-RemoteIP: 83.67.23.108 X-IP-MAIL-FROM: jasonr@gnu.org X-IP-BHB: Once X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: ApgFABmc+UdTQxds/2dsb2JhbACBXKgm X-IP-Direction: IN Original-Received: from i-83-67-23-108.freedom2surf.net (HELO wanchan.jasonrumney.net) ([83.67.23.108]) by smtp.f2s.tiscali.co.uk with ESMTP; 07 Apr 2008 12:03:26 +0100 Original-Received: from [192.168.249.27] (chiko.jasonrumney.net [192.168.249.27]) by wanchan.jasonrumney.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6F93FF5B; Mon, 7 Apr 2008 12:03:30 +0100 (BST) User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.12 (Windows/20080213) In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.6 OpenPGP: id=8086879D X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. 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:94562 Archived-At: Juanma Barranquero wrote: > On Sun, Apr 6, 2008 at 3:42 PM, Jason Rumney wrote: > > >> C-v in a buffer viewing etc/NEWS is near instantaneous for me, so I think >> you'll need to debug why it is taking so long on your machine. >> > > I'm not talking about C-v. I'm talking about scrolling one line at a time. > > I use this in my .emacs > > (setq scroll-preserve-screen-position 'always > scroll-conservatively most-positive-fixnum > scroll-step 0) > > because I *hate* recentering during scroll. > > If you try the above setup with and without the new backend, you'll > see the difference, I think. > I don't see a significant difference, certainly nothing to justify language like "unusable" and "unbearable" that has been used on this thread. Both recenter occasionally when the redisplay cannot keep up with key repeat, with the new font backend it may happen more frequently, but that is not surprising for new development code that has not yet settled down, so noone has tried to optimize it yet.