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: Speed of keyboard macro execution? Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 18:43:06 +0200 Message-ID: <83r3iu9rvp.fsf@gnu.org> References: <20151209163954.0cefcc7f@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> <87si3bcltu.fsf@isaac.fritz.box> <20151209180343.5a67c0e7@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1449765805 6625 80.91.229.3 (10 Dec 2015 16:43:25 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 10 Dec 2015 16:43:25 +0000 (UTC) Cc: deng@randomsample.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Perry E. Metzger" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Dec 10 17:43:14 2015 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 1a74JF-0003eL-SH for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 10 Dec 2015 17:43:14 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42875 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a74JF-0007Kv-5F for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 10 Dec 2015 11:43:13 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:46622) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a74JB-0007Kc-3D for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Dec 2015 11:43:09 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a74J6-0003BE-6k for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Dec 2015 11:43:08 -0500 Original-Received: from mtaout26.012.net.il ([80.179.55.182]:53915) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1a74J5-0003B1-VO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Dec 2015 11:43:04 -0500 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.mtaout26.012.net.il by mtaout26.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NZ500E00IFIP500@mtaout26.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 10 Dec 2015 18:45:32 +0200 (IST) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.94.185.246]) by mtaout26.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NZ500EAGIJVZA00@mtaout26.012.net.il>; Thu, 10 Dec 2015 18:45:32 +0200 (IST) In-reply-to: <20151209180343.5a67c0e7@jabberwock.cb.piermont.com> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 80.179.55.182 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:196024 Archived-At: > Date: Wed, 9 Dec 2015 18:03:43 -0500 > From: "Perry E. Metzger" > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > > On Wed, 09 Dec 2015 23:13:17 +0100 David Engster > wrote: > > Perry E. Metzger writes: > > > Perhaps it would be good to dig in to what is causing the issues > > > in question... > > > > Emacs does not cope very well with very long lines. > > How might that be addressed? This is simply bug#13675. It's a bit disingenuous on the part of that person to compare Emacs with another editor _solely_ where there's a known inefficiency in Emacs, and pretend that this is somehow representative of the general differences in performance between these two editors. After all, how frequently do you need to edit files with lines in excess of 11K characters?