From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Edebug corrupting point in buffers; we need buffer-point and set-buffer-point, perhaps. Date: Tue, 01 Nov 2022 08:21:34 +0200 Message-ID: <83zgdbchzl.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83v8o0dtg3.fsf@gnu.org> <83pme8dp2r.fsf@gnu.org> <83mt9bev37.fsf@gnu.org> Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="12868"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Alan Mackenzie Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Nov 01 07:22:30 2022 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 1opkfO-0003Ai-Li for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 01 Nov 2022 07:22:30 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1opkeo-0004O0-5d; Tue, 01 Nov 2022 02:21:55 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1opkei-0004N4-Vs for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 01 Nov 2022 02:21:49 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1opkei-0000e4-5A; Tue, 01 Nov 2022 02:21:48 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=References:Subject:In-Reply-To:To:From:Date: mime-version; bh=vvNQBDC4U8ETQ+OIr2OWO056RVrMcQrL165SLJX4/RU=; b=Rc0W1eDPrmMk ialfjrEzpayr9FlZrKSDzVOSipEwW1BmwtU4d/3ULb+4DbX68tg6D4nZ4eRgEyd9ki4y8z6Dq3Jnr VPSMkCUKLDc4YvQNCjJ+uT/EPAmuWhpTV6Y5i/1wTOUAdPafVKRLDL738jKMoB/UTU2oYMLpl5gXR AXHVxOufc5D47qzPzahtgzfaQZ7uCUQfuiB+/ywJ9isS9CTG1aZHzgLQBn7Sj7ijfO7DbXY6JHhPd 5TyJUXuY0VpLe7FN/Ydv9+Zks3pGd9NM3t799QGpOSoJTnyD4usMARgSnJ6wtLyeXbL/dHxRvTCG8 v/gRmmRMbskiGls8Jk7/kw==; Original-Received: from [87.69.77.57] (helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1opkeh-0004k2-FR; Tue, 01 Nov 2022 02:21:47 -0400 In-Reply-To: (message from Alan Mackenzie on Mon, 31 Oct 2022 20:46:12 +0000) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:298906 Archived-At: > Date: Mon, 31 Oct 2022 20:46:12 +0000 > Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org > From: Alan Mackenzie > > > 17 times faster doesn't yet tell how important is the speedup, because > > you give no absolute numbers, and they are what's important here. > > I think I did. To quote: > > > It's probably moot, though, since the "slow" restoration only took > > > 0.00137 seconds for all 207 buffers. So if this means that the faster method gains you 1.3 msec for 200 buffers, I think such a difference is negligible in the context of debugging, where code always runs much slower than normally. > OK. I now think these new functions aren't really needed, mainly because > the current way, though much slower, is fast enough. I still think they > would be a neater way of getting/setting a buffer point, but it's not a > big thing. OK, thanks.