From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Scrolling commands and skipping redisplay, was: Re: emacs rendering comparisson between emacs23 and emacs26.3 Date: Mon, 20 Apr 2020 13:47:10 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20200403174757.GA8266@ACM> <83eesvmj15.fsf@gnu.org> <6eec7f68-770e-b3b1-4627-6222f3ef7216@yandex.ru> <83ftd9kwlu.fsf@gnu.org> <1de9d24f-eeb7-7d0a-3768-4baba4365066@yandex.ru> <83zhbcdmyi.fsf@gnu.org> <61f565cd-4fee-d48c-a9ef-b78419b3d058@yandex.ru> <83wo6ed4kb.fsf@gnu.org> <464b5639-7790-fdbc-b519-22a6b0e8c016@yandex.ru> <83o8rqaucp.fsf@gnu.org> <551c7634-f614-c5a7-c089-33a0dc56574d@yandex.ru> <83imhyaqyw.fsf@gnu.org> <3ddcec07-079f-18e8-81a7-76eaf9a8187a@yandex.ru> <83d083ia16.fsf@gnu.org> <83y2qqgrr6.fsf@gnu.org> <837dyagkwm.fsf@gnu.org> <532544ab-55ec-aab9-1c2f-fa0081332401@yandex.ru> <834ktegivn.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="113369"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, rudalics@gmx.at, rrandresf@gmail.com, Dmitry Gutov , acm@muc.de To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Apr 20 19:48:00 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 1jQaWW-000TP7-CM for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 19:48:00 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39906 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jQaWV-0004A3-DT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 13:47:59 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:35672 helo=eggs1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jQaVq-0003jf-U2 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 13:47:19 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs1p.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jQaVq-0007MH-1x for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 13:47:18 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:40487) by eggs1p.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jQaVn-0007KX-Qn; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 13:47:15 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 8C36A81265; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 13:47:13 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id D65058124E; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 13:47:11 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1587404831; bh=XMfPztxtrYXLJBh3K+bbRxum20qUTAX6pBmCIb5+FWs=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=YyXKrf4JpUVYg+f4oVRqKHMlGkiCUqqdPJp+gFdL7bqDZMEitAyaapNZ++XZP6LiN FHrL+oBT69r42xkhopBzEAZ7E4Br4DtpAzsk+kvbu9DyNh9/wW7UXT4GbglpNhLDG5 3nZhBtTVeNBkQRCJ+QGmCf/bugwkfz2EvDkoNI9CxaGLAChcCJ5H5V9dE0fXDsAtKS n20bDYSD6nnAuhZpDt/lc59yvpQalIj+Vpi+WeMhnasJJSovkhUMgqspHGHmuTUp6x pyg5uDHrqhejAVknMtUh6HZIXswO0gY/BqtRTY0gYXhL9rpXZjoISsHB56fmp7VokX UudjOSA9bbHQg== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [104.247.241.114]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 437681205FB; Mon, 20 Apr 2020 13:47:11 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <834ktegivn.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Mon, 20 Apr 2020 20:35:40 +0300") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-detected-operating-system: by eggs1p.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/04/20 09:09:43 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 132.204.25.50 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:247409 Archived-At: >> First of all, it already does. The difference comes up only when Emacs >> is too busy to re-render. > No. If you type C-n twice fast enough, Emacs will behave the same as > if you type C-2 C-n. Actually, I think if Emacs is "idle" before typing those two `C-n`, Emacs will not behave the same as `C-2 C-n` unless they really reach Emacs at the same time (which seems almost impossible unless you're doing it over something like an SSH connection where some delay might end up bundling them together). This is because the `input_was_pending` var is set at the *beginning* of processing the first `C-n` and at that point, the second should not have arrived yet. So AFAICT the redisplay between the two will not be skipped. If you do `C-n C-n C-n` quickly, the redisplay between the second and the third might very well be skipped, OTOH (since the second and third `C-n` might arrive while we're processing the first, in which case `input_was_pending` will be true when processing the second). > And I don't see any point in continue arguing about this, since we > have very different expectations and different perspective. Let's > agree to disagree. Do you think my suggestion to "accumulate" `scroll-conservatively` when redisplay is skipped might be acceptable (I don't actually know if it will/can work, OTOH). Stefan