From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: bug-reference-prog-mode slows down CC Mode's scrolling by ~7% Date: Fri, 03 Sep 2021 18:25:36 -0400 Message-ID: References: <838s0eyyjg.fsf@gnu.org> <83eea5ygub.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="26190"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: 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 Sat Sep 04 00:26:40 2021 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 1mMHdw-0006aU-6g for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 04 Sep 2021 00:26:40 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49764 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mMHdv-0005sE-3v for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 03 Sep 2021 18:26:39 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:40094) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mMHd9-0005BC-0K for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Sep 2021 18:25:51 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:65045) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mMHd6-0005EN-2d; Fri, 03 Sep 2021 18:25:49 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id B38E0100135; Fri, 3 Sep 2021 18:25:46 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg1.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 2E2A91000F8; Fri, 3 Sep 2021 18:25:41 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1630707941; bh=hOesy41iqYap+lwDgkTlVjoEwhy+jVHJzQocndkQZJs=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=hcFATJKa5b35n+kVICmM8a9GMAhYLA30OJMe+fMgxUCVjPOYgJtdLGGG1FuwA8qpe an5JMDFoT7kjN7YUlCveGVQ6rf/5YbhibesUtaYaAmDBDNPeBWuLnUqDo9RN66VMtb MLRfdQr4X4PkZb2YuuoXRiohUonXyehfWylcrbgtwjpb0bve6+bYRvDH699Oiuc4LZ 4Y5237imWvi8BAY6+2eRhlfqNoy8/7/HwTdjzc1uBcS3x+QInNBD9v8noQWQnbDoSq rvPwa4Vojhiayb2OkMq7kQmVhi5pzkzCG8+pMKCwViLiH/Ay7vvDqLxoKC1CHquZHc 0GuNkTRTtGjXg== Original-Received: from milanesa (unknown [104.247.244.135]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 3C27112046D; Fri, 3 Sep 2021 18:25:39 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <83eea5ygub.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Fri, 03 Sep 2021 15:38:20 +0300") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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:273821 Archived-At: > But it does change the result. It changes the overall behavior a bit, yes. And of course, that might trigger bugs somewhere, like any other change. But other than that, it should not change the actual final result other than how fast we get to it, no. > Users of `jit-lock-bounds` should definitely know the importance of > being "the first function". Actually, we could refine the patch to make the ordering automatic, based on measurements so the users of `jit-lock-register` don't need to know about it. Stefan