From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [Emacs-diffs] /srv/bzr/emacs/trunk r109157: Compact buffers when idle. Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 07:54:13 -0400 Message-ID: References: <5007EE20.8010005@yandex.ru> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1342698866 21782 80.91.229.3 (19 Jul 2012 11:54:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2012 11:54:26 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Dmitry Antipov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Jul 19 13:54:26 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1SrpJJ-0005zy-Fh for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 13:54:25 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:43004 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SrpJI-0002SU-Po for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 07:54:24 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:37006) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SrpJC-0002SK-VS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 07:54:23 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SrpJC-0001cQ-0x for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 07:54:18 -0400 Original-Received: from chene.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.20]:33006) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1SrpJB-0001cC-Tk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 07:54:17 -0400 Original-Received: from fmsmemgm.homelinux.net (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by chene.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id q6JBsEKo016652; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 07:54:15 -0400 Original-Received: by fmsmemgm.homelinux.net (Postfix, from userid 20848) id D843CAECFD; Thu, 19 Jul 2012 07:54:13 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <5007EE20.8010005@yandex.ru> (Dmitry Antipov's message of "Thu, 19 Jul 2012 15:23:12 +0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.1.50 (gnu/linux) X-NAI-Spam-Flag: NO X-NAI-Spam-Threshold: 5 X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 1 Rules triggered RV4283=0 X-NAI-Spam-Version: 2.2.0.9309 : core <4283> : streams <787161> : uri <1169274> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 132.204.246.20 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:151757 Archived-At: >> As mentioned in my previous email, I think that the `compact' field of >> struct buffer already provides most of the benefits and we don't need >> the Elisp/idle part of this patch. > I hope that someone will find elisp part useful too :-) I can't think of any case where that would provide any noticeable benefit (whereas I can think of cases where it just wastes resources). The GC is run fairly regularly, also typically while idle, and does the compaction. So until you can provide some concrete and convincing numbers that show some benefit, I'd ask you to remove that pat of your patch. Stefan