From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: How to add pseudo vector types Date: Sat, 24 Jul 2021 10:06:10 +0300 Message-ID: <834kck1999.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83h7gw6pyj.fsf@gnu.org> <45EBF16A-C953-42C7-97D1-3A2BFEF7DD01@gmail.com> <83y2a764oy.fsf@gnu.org> <83v95b60fn.fsf@gnu.org> <00DD5BFE-D14E-449A-9319-E7B725DEBFB3@gmail.com> <83r1fz5xr9.fsf@gnu.org> <1AAB1BCC-362B-4249-B785-4E0530E15C60@gmail.com> <83czri67h0.fsf@gnu.org> <46BBFF88-76C3-4818-8805-5437409BEA93@gmail.com> <83wnpq46uk.fsf@gnu.org> <533BD53B-4E85-4E9E-B46A-346A5BBAD0F5@gmail.com> <258CB68D-1CC1-42C8-BDCD-2A8A8099B783@gmail.com> <1a776770-50b7-93cd-6591-c9a5b3a56eb8@gmail.com> <83lf654dhk.fsf@gnu.org> <2524265f-60c7-24f5-b9f4-98447c91acab@gmail.com> <86o8av4olc.fsf@stephe-leake.org> <976cd611-52b3-5280-263e-ab8e3db8a355@gmail.com> <83k0lj4fml.fsf@gnu.org> <86a6mca06b.fsf@stephe-leake.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="26038"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: cpitclaudel@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stephen Leake Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Jul 24 09:07:16 2021 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 1m7Bki-0006dN-Nl for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 24 Jul 2021 09:07:16 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:50830 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m7Bkg-0003g9-Fb for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 24 Jul 2021 03:07:14 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:51338) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m7Bjt-0002zU-Kl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 24 Jul 2021 03:06:25 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:32776) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m7Bjt-0004SM-4D; Sat, 24 Jul 2021 03:06:25 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.95.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.95]:1370 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m7Bjs-0001PD-LI; Sat, 24 Jul 2021 03:06:24 -0400 In-Reply-To: <86a6mca06b.fsf@stephe-leake.org> (message from Stephen Leake on Fri, 23 Jul 2021 19:57:32 -0700) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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:271528 Archived-At: > From: Stephen Leake > Cc: Clément Pit-Claudel , > emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Fri, 23 Jul 2021 19:57:32 -0700 > > > How much "less"? Close to 1 sec is indeed annoying, but 20 msec or so > > should be bearable. > > > > You seem to assume up front that TS (re)-parsing will take 1 sec, but > > AFAIK there's no reason to assume such bad performance. > > This is for the initial parse, on a large file. No matter how fast the > parser is, I can give you a file that takes one second to parse, and > some user will have such a file (the work always expands to consume all > the resources available). That problem is already with us: if I visit xdisp.c in an unoptimized build of Emacs 28, I wait almost 4 sec for the first window-full to be displayed. (It's more like 0.5 sec in an optimized build of Emacs 27.2.) So the real question is how much using TS will _improve_ the situation. > I just got incremental parse working well enough to measure it; in the > largest Ada file I have (10,000 lines from Eurocontrol): > > initial parse: 1.539319 seconds > re-indent two lines: 0.038999 seconds > > 39 milliseconds for re-indent is just slow enough to be noticeable; I still > have algorithms to convert to be as incremental as possible. For comparison, how much does re-indentation of 2 lines take in Emacs without a parser? 39 msec might be noticeable, but it isn't annoying; anything below 50 msec isn't. Try "C-x TAB" in Emacs on 10-line block of text, and you get more than that. So if you consider that time a problem, it is here already as well. > The initial parse includes sending the full file text to the external > process over a pipe. So the above results are with wisi. We need timings with TS to see the results that really matter for this discussion. > I don't have a direct comparison of tree-sitter and wisi parsing the > same file; I'll have to see if I can set that up. Please do. Otherwise we are comparing apples with oranges. They are all fruit, but still... Thanks.