From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Chong Yidong Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Font-lock in COMINT modes Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 11:36:03 -0500 Message-ID: <87wt4pduvg.fsf@stupidchicken.com> References: <87vekaf780.fsf@stupidchicken.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1166461790 26955 80.91.229.2 (18 Dec 2006 17:09:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 17:09:50 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Dec 18 18:09:49 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GwLTM-0004pA-4h for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 18 Dec 2006 17:36:17 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GwLTK-0006aW-Qg for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 18 Dec 2006 11:36:14 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GwLT7-0006We-5L for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Dec 2006 11:36:01 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GwLT3-0006SU-Um for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Dec 2006 11:36:00 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GwLT3-0006SR-S8 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Dec 2006 11:35:57 -0500 Original-Received: from [18.19.1.138] (helo=cyd.mit.edu) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1GwLSy-0001ng-9R; Mon, 18 Dec 2006 11:35:52 -0500 Original-Received: by cyd.mit.edu (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 4C9824E45A; Mon, 18 Dec 2006 11:36:03 -0500 (EST) Original-To: rms@gnu.org In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Mon\, 18 Dec 2006 11\:00\:02 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.91 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:63922 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > I listed in FOR-RELEASE that this case is slow: > > You must have gotten that impression from Stefan's 12/08 message: > > if [font-lock-defaults ] is nil font-lock-mode-internal is not > activated at all. AFAIK nil and (nil t) are equivalent (i.e. don't > highlight anything), except that (nil t) takes a lot more CPU to do > nothing (it runs all the font-lock-foo-function hooks, enables > jit-lock so as to do nothing just-in-time rather than eagerly, > checks where nothing needs to be done, rounds up to a whole number > of lines the region upon which inaction is requested, checks if > there's a multiline entity and extends the region even more, so that > nothing is done in a multiline way, ...). > > Even though it is true that font lock jumps through more hoops with > (nil t), there is no evidence that this slowdown affects the user. > > > Could you check and see? I haven't been able to observe any slowdown when font-lock-defaults is (nil t). Not surprising, since I don't notice any slowdown when font-lock-defaults is (something t), i.e. normal font-lock situations! Maybe someone running on a 486 can observe a difference, who knows.