From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Split `simple.el'? Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2018 11:55:29 +0300 Message-ID: <838ta34agu.fsf@gnu.org> References: <5f1e960c-483f-4902-b4c2-b7a4ca3b04f4@default> <10c96362-297f-db97-d4a9-da3d66d4dd34@cs.ucla.edu> <83fu4b4got.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1522832009 24170 195.159.176.226 (4 Apr 2018 08:53:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 4 Apr 2018 08:53:29 +0000 (UTC) Cc: eggert@cs.ucla.edu, monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Andreas Schwab Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 04 10:53:25 2018 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1f3eAW-0006BG-O8 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 10:53:24 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44445 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f3eCc-0006HE-2i for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 04:55:34 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:57286) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f3eCS-0006Fs-8l for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 04:55:25 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f3eCP-0004zq-84 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 04:55:24 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:35685) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1f3eCP-0004zm-4E; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 04:55:21 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=4364 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1f3eCN-0007pj-BM; Wed, 04 Apr 2018 04:55:20 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Andreas Schwab on Wed, 04 Apr 2018 10:19:32 +0200) 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: 2.1.21 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:224312 Archived-At: > From: Andreas Schwab > Cc: Stefan Monnier , eggert@cs.ucla.edu, emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Wed, 04 Apr 2018 10:19:32 +0200 > > >> Usually non-displayed characters do not affect the time to > >> open&display it. > > > > They do, because Emacs searches all the available fonts to try to find > > one that can display such characters. > > But not until that part of the file is actually rendered. Yes, of course (though redisplay many times looks also at characters a short ways above or below what will be visible). Do we have any evidence that in this case the slowdown happens also when the problematic part of the file is nowhere near the visible part of the buffer?