From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Chong Yidong Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel,gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Strange slowness when killing words interactively Date: Sun, 01 May 2011 21:13:01 -0400 Message-ID: <87pqo1oqg2.fsf@stupidchicken.com> References: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1304298800 7932 80.91.229.12 (2 May 2011 01:13:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 2 May 2011 01:13:20 +0000 (UTC) Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Taylor Venable Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon May 02 03:13:16 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QGhhL-0007QH-8s for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 02 May 2011 03:13:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:38375 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QGhhK-0005YI-9h for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 01 May 2011 21:13:14 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:44444) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QGhhH-0005UD-Kx for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 01 May 2011 21:13:12 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QGhhG-000513-OC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 01 May 2011 21:13:11 -0400 Original-Received: from vm-emlprdomr-05.its.yale.edu ([130.132.50.146]:44397) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1QGhhE-00050m-Ln; Sun, 01 May 2011 21:13:08 -0400 Original-Received: from furball (static-66-16-23-114.dsl.cavtel.net [66.16.23.114]) (authenticated bits=0) by vm-emlprdomr-05.its.yale.edu (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id p421D5mg002721 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NOT); Sun, 1 May 2011 21:13:06 -0400 Original-Received: by furball (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 86E451604BC; Sun, 1 May 2011 21:13:01 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: (Taylor Venable's message of "Sun, 1 May 2011 20:22:37 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.71 on 130.132.50.146 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 130.132.50.146 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:138950 gmane.emacs.help:80895 Archived-At: Taylor Venable writes: > I've found the location where the slowness creeps into kill-word and > friends. Looking at kill-region in simple.el, the part that is very > slow for my system is adding to the kill ring. If I comment those > lines out (as shown in http://paste.lisp.org/+2LWP) then the sluggish > response disappears. It's odd to me that I don't see this behaviour > when I start Emacs with -nw as I would (perhaps naively) think that > slowness in kill-region would be independent of what user interface is > active. On a graphical terminal, kill-new calls interprogram-cut-function to set the clipboard (or the X selection, for Emacs 23). That may be causing the slowdown. Could you set interprogram-cut-function to nil and see if it makes any difference? If so, we need to figure out why interprogram-cut-function is slow on your computer.