From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Miles Bader Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Display slowness that is painful Date: Wed, 01 Feb 2006 14:15:52 +0900 Message-ID: References: <87slr5c78p.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <877j8fx43q.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87acdblr9b.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> <87mzhbd6kv.fsf@stupidchicken.com> Reply-To: Miles Bader NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1138770987 22461 80.91.229.2 (1 Feb 2006 05:16:27 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 1 Feb 2006 05:16:27 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, Stefan Monnier , rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Feb 01 06:16:23 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 1F4ALs-0004PK-B4 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 01 Feb 2006 06:16:21 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1F4AOt-00014c-05 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 01 Feb 2006 00:19:27 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1F4AOf-00014X-C2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 01 Feb 2006 00:19:13 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1F4AOd-00014C-PJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 01 Feb 2006 00:19:13 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1F4AOd-000149-MQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 01 Feb 2006 00:19:11 -0500 Original-Received: from [203.180.232.82] (helo=mgate02.necel.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1F4AN7-00041L-VL; Wed, 01 Feb 2006 00:17:38 -0500 Original-Received: from relay11.aps.necel.com (relay11 [10.29.19.46]) by mgate02.necel.com (8.13.1/8.13.1) with ESMTP id k112imQB020782; Wed, 1 Feb 2006 14:15:53 +0900 (JST) Original-Received: from relay11.aps.necel.com ([10.29.19.16] [10.29.19.16]) by relay11.aps.necel.com with ESMTP; Wed, 1 Feb 2006 14:15:53 +0900 Original-Received: from dhapc248.dev.necel.com ([10.114.97.235] [10.114.97.235]) by relay11.aps.necel.com with ESMTP; Wed, 1 Feb 2006 14:15:52 +0900 Original-Received: by dhapc248.dev.necel.com (Postfix, from userid 31295) id AA5D0488; Wed, 1 Feb 2006 14:15:52 +0900 (JST) Original-To: Chong Yidong System-Type: i686-pc-linux-gnu Blat: Foop In-Reply-To: <87mzhbd6kv.fsf@stupidchicken.com> (Chong Yidong's message of "Tue, 31 Jan 2006 23:52:00 -0500") Original-Lines: 14 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:49865 Archived-At: Chong Yidong writes: > I'm confused. How does it make sense to display characters in \XXX > format instead? Both methods produce gibberish (as one would expect > of a binary file). So we might as well choose the gibberish that > redisplays faster. Because gibberish with a big "Gibberish" label (which is sort of what the octal syntax is) is a lot more presentable, and looks less like Emacs just fucked something up. -miles -- "Suppose we've chosen the wrong god. Every time we go to church we're just making him madder and madder." -- Homer Simpson