From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: emacs rendering comparisson between emacs23 and emacs26.3 Date: Tue, 07 Apr 2020 22:29:21 -0400 Message-ID: References: <86tv2h2vww.fsf@gmail.com> <20200322123818.GB32470@ACM> <87eetk5swm.fsf@gnu.org> <20200326193128.GC14092@ACM> <86d08y4zsx.fsf@gmail.com> <83sghs7qdz.fsf@gnu.org> <83h7y63sjj.fsf@gnu.org> <834ku43c61.fsf@gnu.org> <83k12zz6ds.fsf@gnu.org> <054393f3-3873-ab6e-b325-0eca354d8838@gmx.at> <83eet0sqb2.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=Utf-8 Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="5433"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: rudalics@gmx.at, rrandresf@gmail.com, acm@muc.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 08 04:30:08 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 1jM0Tg-0001IB-18 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 08 Apr 2020 04:30:08 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55308 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jM0Tf-0006bu-1t for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 07 Apr 2020 22:30:07 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:42972) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jM0Sy-0005aA-Dm for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Apr 2020 22:29:25 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:43353) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jM0Sx-0008GM-Kl; Tue, 07 Apr 2020 22:29:23 -0400 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1jM0Sv-0003Zk-Mf; Tue, 07 Apr 2020 22:29:21 -0400 In-Reply-To: <83eet0sqb2.fsf@gnu.org> (message from Eli Zaretskii on Mon, 06 Apr 2020 16:21:21 +0300) 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:246630 Archived-At: [[[ To any NSA and FBI agents reading my email: please consider ]]] [[[ whether defending the US Constitution against all enemies, ]]] [[[ foreign or domestic, requires you to follow Snowden's example. ]]] > > > > > Recent Emacsen either ignore that variable or silently reset it to nil > > > internally so it doesn't get into their way. Their progmodes either > > > always scan an entire buffer from its beginning or use some elaborate, > > > fragile techniques to find such a top level position. Moreover, our > > > underlying mechanism for syntax highlighting always marks the entire > > > rest of a buffer as dirty after every single editing change. This has > > > the consequence that that entire part has to be continuously rescanned > > > when some of it is shown in another window. > > > > Does anyone disagree with this specific factual claim? > I'm not sure what is "the claim" here, The factual statements in the paragraph I quoted, above. but I want to point out a small > inaccuracy: redisplay doesn't "continuously rescan the entire rest of > the buffer", it only rescans the part(s) shown in windows. (It might > happen that some major mode's font-lock definitions end up rescanning > much more, but that's a separate issue.) Isn't that separate issue the issue we are talking about. And frankly, what would we > like Emacs to do instead? It would scan only from the last open-paren-in-column-zero, as it did in the past. A change in a buffer can potentially affect > the fontification of the rest of the buffer, and I don't think we > would like Emacs to fail to update other windows showing the same > buffer I have a feeling there has been a change of topic here, but I can't be sure. -- Dr Richard Stallman Chief GNUisance of the GNU Project (https://gnu.org) Founder, Free Software Foundation (https://fsf.org) Internet Hall-of-Famer (https://internethalloffame.org)