From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: jit-lock-antiblink-grace Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2019 13:45:43 +0300 Message-ID: <83k198ly94.fsf@gnu.org> References: <834l0enw8c.fsf@gnu.org> <83y2xqm6m4.fsf@gnu.org> <83o8ymlzkk.fsf@gnu.org> <835zktm9o0.fsf@gnu.org> <83o8ylknjw.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="33449"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: =?utf-8?B?Sm/Do28gVMOhdm9yYQ==?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Oct 13 12:47:35 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iJbPT-0008Y6-2X for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 13 Oct 2019 12:47:35 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38668 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iJbPR-0007Bf-6f for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 13 Oct 2019 06:47:33 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:60173) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iJbNv-00078p-7f for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 13 Oct 2019 06:46:00 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:56410) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iJbNu-0004LQ-Q5; Sun, 13 Oct 2019 06:45:58 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=3486 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1iJbNn-0004yk-69; Sun, 13 Oct 2019 06:45:54 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from =?utf-8?B?Sm/Do28gVMOhdm9yYQ==?= on Sun, 13 Oct 2019 11:28:39 +0100) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:240955 Archived-At: > From: João Távora > Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2019 11:28:39 +0100 > Cc: emacs-devel , Stefan Monnier > > Speaking of benchmarks, what is the correct way to benchmark this, > i.e. to simulate "paging down a file". Is it just sth like > > (while t (call-interactively 'next-line)) > > ? Or should I add a `redisplay` or something else there? For timing the effect of post-command-hook, you need to actually invoke many commands. I suggest to lean on the DOWN arrow for a fixed amount of time, say, 30 sec, and see how far into the file did you go, and what was the average CPU load (e.g, as shown by display-time-mode or by 'top').