From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Gregory Heytings Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: CC Mode with font-lock-maximum-decoration 2 Date: Tue, 09 Aug 2022 19:49:53 +0000 Message-ID: <703c2351d99efc2db6d1@heytings.org> References: <83y1w0w0gk.fsf@gnu.org> <83pmhcvugm.fsf@gnu.org> <83czdbwjfr.fsf@gnu.org> <837d3jvu9f.fsf@gnu.org> <5e6d30abc39860ef5e37@heytings.org> <5e6d30abc37e2e9fc75f@heytings.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="3476"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Alan Mackenzie Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Aug 09 21:52:32 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1oLVHD-0000ig-IH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 09 Aug 2022 21:52:31 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:58608 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oLVHC-00005K-Fm for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 09 Aug 2022 15:52:30 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:49550) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oLVEi-0007Dc-OJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 09 Aug 2022 15:50:00 -0400 Original-Received: from heytings.org ([95.142.160.155]:44408) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oLVEh-0002j4-0Z; Tue, 09 Aug 2022 15:49:56 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=heytings.org; s=20220101; t=1660074593; bh=krRRpNkcjdELtafarc2Ij2pmR5hxs+Hqq+eDmaylPxE=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References:From; b=J9STPrx1uBIZSu4HI+SpmS2xAd/k6HK9B1sBA8t/JYLkVJkuvZ2Be9bmXinHzTCCW WaWiMjWa60PSozP6dQK2h98nZ7aOLmbWHbdIiD7I4+aJZIAFnY3IApQzYWpQLZENOT DRCtBfVZT3G8Gfbzv1EwvNVs+NZ/eozvACelBf+p25Hi97AmcYU+WqJ6YlP1/vjDZK c+FcD+9zpGeaNWqtD3vGMR+Tp/4z17y4YFLX/13c4incWRR0ToRKgUrDfrtO+7rVFq FgNqBzbFXr2vcYimUG7YE2JGxA/G7Hq+MttvU8KDc+nIot+kFCarTvQZs+k1vF5RJD uWQ0DdEbsJ6lw== In-Reply-To: <5e6d30abc37e2e9fc75f@heytings.org> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=95.142.160.155; envelope-from=gregory@heytings.org; helo=heytings.org X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:293330 Archived-At: >> I think the bit you missed was: >> >>> I don't know what makes it [CC Mode with font-lock-maximum-decoration 2] >> >> Try it again with that setting. > > Indeed, that was it. > That being said, IMO that comparison is unfair, because Emacs Lisp has only two fontification levels, so font-lock-maximum-decoration t and 2 are the same (and likewise nil and 1 are the same). A fairer comparison would be to use one less than the maximum level in each case, that is, font-lock-maximum-decoration 2 for CC Mode and font-lock-maximum-decoration 1 for Emacs Lisp. In which case the numbers are much less favorable: 1. (benchmark-run 1 (time-scroll)) is 3.3 seconds for complex.el and 6.2 seconds for xdisp.c, two times slower; 2. (benchmark-run 1 (font-lock-fontify-region (point-min) (point-max))) is 0.25 seconds for complex.el and 1.75 seconds for xdisp.c, seven times slower.