From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?=C3=93scar_Fuentes?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: How to add pseudo vector types Date: Thu, 22 Jul 2021 16:11:09 +0200 Message-ID: <878s1yigle.fsf@telefonica.net> References: <83h7gw6pyj.fsf@gnu.org> <45EBF16A-C953-42C7-97D1-3A2BFEF7DD01@gmail.com> <83y2a764oy.fsf@gnu.org> <83v95b60fn.fsf@gnu.org> <00DD5BFE-D14E-449A-9319-E7B725DEBFB3@gmail.com> <83r1fz5xr9.fsf@gnu.org> <1AAB1BCC-362B-4249-B785-4E0530E15C60@gmail.com> <83czri67h0.fsf@gnu.org> <46BBFF88-76C3-4818-8805-5437409BEA93@gmail.com> <83wnpq46uk.fsf@gnu.org> <533BD53B-4E85-4E9E-B46A-346A5BBAD0F5@gmail.com> <258CB68D-1CC1-42C8-BDCD-2A8A8099B783@gmail.com> <1a776770-50b7-93cd-6591-c9a5b3a56eb8@gmail.com> <8335s64v10.fsf@gnu.org> <5380C92B-6C15-4490-A1E0-1C3132DBB16A@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="6548"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Cancel-Lock: sha1:OgtROoKfkcsgMmTouANyt/mb63A= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Jul 22 16:12:27 2021 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 1m6ZR2-0001XE-LX for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 22 Jul 2021 16:12:24 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59812 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m6ZR1-0005b2-N7 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 22 Jul 2021 10:12:23 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:46954) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m6ZPx-0004HO-PI for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Jul 2021 10:11:17 -0400 Original-Received: from ciao.gmane.io ([116.202.254.214]:37454) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1m6ZPw-00051k-1e for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Jul 2021 10:11:17 -0400 Original-Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1m6ZPu-000Ae5-IF for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 22 Jul 2021 16:11:14 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ Received-SPF: pass client-ip=116.202.254.214; envelope-from=ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; helo=ciao.gmane.io X-Spam_score_int: -16 X-Spam_score: -1.7 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.7 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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:271467 Archived-At: Yuan Fu writes: > That leads to another point. I suspect the memory limit will come > before the speed limit, i.e., as the file size increases, the memory > consumption will become unacceptable before the speed does. So it is > possible that we want to outright disable tree-sitter for larger > files, then we don’t need to do much to improve the responsiveness of > tree-sitter on large files. And we might want to delete the parse tree > if a buffer has been idle for a while. Of course, that’s just my > superstition, we’ll see once we can measure the performance. Of course those parameters would be configurable on Emacs, but disabling TS on a 2MB file because it uses 20MB is way too conservative, IMHO. Nowadays the cheapest netbook comes with at least 1GB RAM and can do memory-to-memory copies at a rate of GB/s. Guys, you are speculating too much about minutia and worst-case scenarios. (Do we really care about TS not supporting files larger than 4GB? I mean, REALLY?) I'll rather focus on implementing the thing and optimize later. My bet is that a crude implementation would work fine for the 99% of the users and be an improvement over what we have now on practically all cases. BTW, a 10x AST/source-code size ratio is quite reasonable.