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: redisplay system of emacs Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 13:19:53 -0500 Message-ID: References: <27349166.post@talk.nabble.com> <83bpge50k5.fsf@gnu.org> <87vdem8gly.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <87k4v1xm4l.fsf@gmail.com> <87ljfhkyg2.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1264789213 28953 80.91.229.12 (29 Jan 2010 18:20:13 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 29 Jan 2010 18:20:13 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: David Kastrup Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Jan 29 19:20:08 2010 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NavRu-0001ya-OQ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 19:20:07 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44702 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NavRu-0002yS-6a for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 13:20:06 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NavRp-0002yH-4W for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 13:20:01 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1NavRk-0002vM-Ij for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 13:20:00 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=58500 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1NavRk-0002vG-Fj for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 13:19:56 -0500 Original-Received: from pruche.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.22]:37238) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NavRi-0000P3-NV; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 13:19:54 -0500 Original-Received: from faina.iro.umontreal.ca (faina.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.26.177]) by pruche.dit.umontreal.ca (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id o0TIJr16010141; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 13:19:53 -0500 Original-Received: by faina.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 5069C3A7A3; Fri, 29 Jan 2010 13:19:53 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <87ljfhkyg2.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> (David Kastrup's message of "Fri, 29 Jan 2010 11:17:01 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.1.91 (gnu/linux) X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 1 Rules triggered RV3459=0 X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) 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:120663 Archived-At: > In fact, the size of the total document should not affect editing > speed. And we are not just talking "editing" or fixed documents here: > run-off compilation/log output needs to be fast. That's the ideal goal, yes. And Emacs is hopefully closer to it than web browsers. But Emacs is definitely not there in general: in some cases (fundamental-mode, no line-number-mode, ...), it's mostly there, but once you add enough font-locking and stuff, document size does matter. So we end up only caring about "fast enough on oldish hardware when editing fairly large documents", and give up on "still fast even on C header files larger than your memory" (sorry, Alan ;-) Stefan