From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: emacs rendering comparisson between emacs23 and emacs26.3 Date: Sun, 05 Apr 2020 19:15:45 +0300 Message-ID: <83y2r9syby.fsf@gnu.org> References: <834ku43c61.fsf@gnu.org> <83k12zz6ds.fsf@gnu.org> <054393f3-3873-ab6e-b325-0eca354d8838@gmx.at> <20200403174757.GA8266@ACM> <20200404104553.GA5329@ACM> <07fe3b69-3ab2-3173-0696-cb17809e2b91@gmx.at> <83blo7v68b.fsf@gnu.org> <1845d7aa-9ae4-3d95-6a30-c7b1d8d8adec@gmx.at> <83a73qt6zs.fsf@gnu.org> <97c4254e-ff43-8402-3645-f713c408c245@gmx.at> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="1333"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: acm@muc.de, rrandresf@gmail.com, rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: martin rudalics Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Apr 05 18:16:49 2020 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 1jL7x3-0000FP-JC for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 05 Apr 2020 18:16:49 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49820 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jL7x2-0006W2-Mq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 05 Apr 2020 12:16:48 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:43953) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jL7wJ-000630-BM for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 05 Apr 2020 12:16:04 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:39564) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jL7wI-0006wC-K5; Sun, 05 Apr 2020 12:16:02 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=2069 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1jL7wA-0008J1-T7; Sun, 05 Apr 2020 12:15:55 -0400 In-Reply-To: <97c4254e-ff43-8402-3645-f713c408c245@gmx.at> (message from martin rudalics on Sun, 5 Apr 2020 17:50:33 +0200) 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:246467 Archived-At: > Cc: acm@muc.de, rrandresf@gmail.com, rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org > From: martin rudalics > Date: Sun, 5 Apr 2020 17:50:33 +0200 > > I cannot nearly simulate the problem using a simple loop that steadily > invokes say (forward-line 50) followed by a (sit-for 0). 50 such > invocations take 16.7 seconds here, 22.7 with (forward-line -50). And > redisplay takes place as expected here. So it's likely the mouse wheel > input mounting up that inhibits redisplay. Not forward-line, scroll-up. That's what wheel.el calls. > Do you at least see CPU activity significantly go up when you do such > mouse wheel scrolling? With what build? With the -O0 build with --enable-checking, I don't need the mouse: it's enough to lean on C-v and let the keyboard auto-repeat do its job -- one execution unit of the CPU maxes out after 5 to 10 C-v's. But with a -O2 optimized production build, Emacs keeps up both when I lean on C-v and when I turn the mouse wheel constantly. Anyway, you don't need to work too hard to get me started on how slow CC Mode is, especially when re-indentation is involved in addition to font-lock. Which is why I think we should move away of regexp-based and SMIE-based engines towards fast parsers written in C.