Re: Bug #25608 and the comment-cache branch

[Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru>]

On 03.02.2017 18:44, Alan Mackenzie wrote:

> Perhaps, for clarity's sake, you could post this alternative patch here,
> or if it's big, put it into a scratch branch.  Then, at least we'll all
> know that we're talking about the same thing.

I've already posted the url. The path is in the comments of the bug 
you're purportedly trying to fix. So here is the message you unlimately 
ignored: http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2016-12/msg01075.html

If the patch is not good enough for some reasons, please post those, 
with specific examples. And I'm sure we can improve it.

> I'm not sure what you want them for.

To see how they compare performance-wise, at least. "syntax-ppss cache 
is slow" was one of the big reasons for introducing the text property 
cache implemented via text properties, written in C, IIRC.

So you should be able to demonstrate this stark difference in performance.

> The "alternative patch" didn't
> scan comments correctly all the time when I looked at it, just as the
> current back_comment doesn't.

Please remind us of the specific problems it has.

> But, post the patch, remind me precisely
> what you want tested,

Can you read the message archive (that I've linked to above), or should 
I copy the past messages here?

> and I'll do it.
> 
> Constructive criticism of comment-cache would be most welcome.

Just look up the previous threads on the subject. Surely you don't 
expect people to rehash the arguments time and time again.