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: emacs rendering comparisson between emacs23 and emacs26.3 Date: Mon, 06 Apr 2020 23:17:15 -0400 Message-ID: References: <20200403174757.GA8266@ACM> <20200404104553.GA5329@ACM> <07fe3b69-3ab2-3173-0696-cb17809e2b91@gmx.at> <83blo7v68b.fsf@gnu.org> <1845d7aa-9ae4-3d95-6a30-c7b1d8d8adec@gmx.at> <83a73qt6zs.fsf@gnu.org> <97c4254e-ff43-8402-3645-f713c408c245@gmx.at> <83y2r9syby.fsf@gnu.org> <83tv1xsset.fsf@gnu.org> <5ba98104-7154-972a-743a-9865e10ae3dd@yandex.ru> <8e18b4dd-3845-5bdf-6e00-81a0ef0886dd@yandex.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="62333"; 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, acm@muc.de, Eli Zaretskii To: Dmitry Gutov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Apr 07 05:18:01 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 1jLekS-000G3R-JP for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 07 Apr 2020 05:18:00 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40326 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jLekR-0001mY-MS for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 06 Apr 2020 23:17:59 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:45581) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jLejr-0001JK-Ec for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Apr 2020 23:17:24 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jLejp-000127-VO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 06 Apr 2020 23:17:22 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:8295) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1jLejn-0000zg-Bi; Mon, 06 Apr 2020 23:17:19 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 12EC68119B; Mon, 6 Apr 2020 23:17:18 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 6A93E80374; Mon, 6 Apr 2020 23:17:16 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1586229436; bh=CpIT5gBD6bs4eyH73KJ2U7W/Q//hpR04f0MZTi1xo20=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=aZ+D6Jt3ozvvr9WNAgqWaJRrsuOS2UHc2Z7+Cv12ulall/wd6ypeLGmULXWGnG6nu 0rbEbYER/vCjF9o0nSo7rpurCKG72R8/mrInyYeR/SPDdG9J6Q2EbX1qj/xuioCu/h o+gQTi1UJbDS5w5DfImlTrxogueQHQ4cAofRZRJUII0RrW3cBP1Th1tXJqSornItiz c19g3Za5lsqno5aUOLYKrXUe5DJKpItRAP593Fe+8VU1EPbjvTUK1s4k1PooD2LtVG 1g9EgCzxoLj8DyweVY+pcmkKnYSt3fQAoQvM2kH53XZJTsQcAoW1PmHthXkB1zD0y1 seAWO87HcANrw== Original-Received: from alfajor (unknown [104.247.241.114]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id DADF0120376; Mon, 6 Apr 2020 23:17:15 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <8e18b4dd-3845-5bdf-6e00-81a0ef0886dd@yandex.ru> (Dmitry Gutov's message of "Tue, 7 Apr 2020 02:53:24 +0300") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/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:246580 Archived-At: >>> that = skip jit-lock when input is pending. >> AFAIK jit-lock is never skipped: it's (part of) the redisplay which is >> skipped (and that in turn may include calls to jit-lock). > This sounds like splitting hairs; if the part containing it is skipped, then > jit-lock is skipped as well, obviously. > > Does that happen when fast-but-imprecise-scrolling is nil as well? Skipping redisplay when there's pending input happens regardless of `fast-but-imprecise-scrolling`. Now here's where "splitting hairs" becomes important: while the choice to skip redisplay is not affected by `fast-but-imprecise-scrolling`, the choice to skip jit-lock *is*. > Or is the situation that redisplay skips jit-lock when there's pending input > (a good thing), but scrolling commands go back and force it anyway, to > compute the new positions to scroll to? That's right (tho, AFAIK the scrolling commands cause jit-lock *before* redisplay happens, so "go back" is not quite accurate). Stefan