From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [Emacs-diffs] comment-cache 223d16f 2/3: Apply `comment-depth' text properties when calling `back_comment'. Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2016 22:36:44 +0200 Message-ID: <8360wvo0bn.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20160308132530.861.91488@vcs.savannah.gnu.org> <20160308183010.GB6269@acm.fritz.box> <20160309174816.GE3948@acm.fritz.box> <56E0805F.3050804@gmx.at> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1457555829 13697 80.91.229.3 (9 Mar 2016 20:37:09 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 20:37:09 +0000 (UTC) Cc: acm@muc.de, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Mar 09 21:37:04 2016 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 1adkqj-0008Rk-SH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2016 21:36:53 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44269 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1adkqi-0003UX-Tk for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2016 15:36:52 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:45703) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1adkqU-0003U5-Pq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2016 15:36:39 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1adkqQ-0005yp-Pi for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 09 Mar 2016 15:36:38 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:46585) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1adkqQ-0005yj-ME; Wed, 09 Mar 2016 15:36:34 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:4268 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1adkqP-0002OT-4u; Wed, 09 Mar 2016 15:36:34 -0500 In-reply-to: <56E0805F.3050804@gmx.at> (message from martin rudalics on Wed, 09 Mar 2016 20:58:23 +0100) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e 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:201317 Archived-At: > Date: Wed, 09 Mar 2016 20:58:23 +0100 > From: martin rudalics > Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org > > However, ‘foo’ is about ten times slower than for a version of Emacs > 24.2 which is about two times slower than for a version of Emacs 23.0. > ‘bar’ is about 5 times slower than the Emacs 24.2 version which is 3.5 > times slower than the one from Emacs 23.0. > > So, for example, executing ‘bar’ for my Emacs 23.0 took 24.89 seconds > (0.068 for an average call) versus 464.375 seconds (1.272 average) with > the comment-cache version. This means that performance has deteriorated > by a factor of 18 over the past years. This also means that I cannot > use non-optimized builds for my daily work any more. I concur that the current C mode is much slower than it was several releases ago. My personal subjective impression is that it gets slower with every new release, and I suspect that the main reason is our desire to support more and more C quirks and subtleties. If this is true, I'd be glad to go back to a simpler C mode, which sometimes mis-fontified or even (gasp!) mis-indented an occasional rare construct, but to get back the speed we enjoyed in the past.