From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Display slowness that is painful Date: Thu, 02 Feb 2006 09:00:19 -0500 Message-ID: <87zml9kgqm.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> References: <87slr5c78p.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <877j8fx43q.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87mzhaqp7p.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 1138906968 11561 80.91.229.2 (2 Feb 2006 19:02:48 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 2 Feb 2006 19:02:48 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Feb 02 20:02:42 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 1F4jiR-0001WS-J1 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2006 20:02:00 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1F4jlZ-0000hu-BP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2006 14:05:13 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1F4gDl-0004ae-7E for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2006 10:18:05 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1F4gCK-0004JT-6I for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2006 10:16:39 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1F4f3j-00041r-Vp for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Feb 2006 09:03:40 -0500 Original-Received: from [209.226.175.34] (helo=tomts13-srv.bellnexxia.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1F4f2U-0000uf-Sn; Thu, 02 Feb 2006 09:02:23 -0500 Original-Received: from alfajor ([67.71.26.32]) by tomts13-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.13 201-253-122-130-113-20050324) with ESMTP id <20060202140019.DMCE20927.tomts13-srv.bellnexxia.net@alfajor>; Thu, 2 Feb 2006 09:00:19 -0500 Original-Received: by alfajor (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 98DEA2FD60; Thu, 2 Feb 2006 09:00:19 -0500 (EST) Original-To: Chong Yidong In-Reply-To: <87mzhaqp7p.fsf@stupidchicken.com> (Chong Yidong's message of "Thu, 02 Feb 2006 00:55:38 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (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:49931 Archived-At: > In this particular case, having looked through the relevant redisplay > code, I don't see any apparent code stupidity going on. It's simply > the case that, in this file, the first "newline" takes place 340,000 > characters in. The normally negligible delay from displaying glyphs > in octal format (v.s. unibyte-display-via-language-environment) is > magnified by this amount. Oh, I see, so the "4 times more work per char" is actually not compensated by the "4 times fewer chars" since these are not displayed anyway. So it seems to be a plain and simple algorithmic "bug" (linear rather than constant time complexity), which has been around for a long time already. Given this, I agree that it doesn't have to be fixed before the release (tho of course if someone can come up with a quick fix, that's great). Stefan