From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Glenn Morris Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#6365: bidi data structure inefficiencies Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2011 17:22:40 -0400 Message-ID: <7uy5wx3jdr.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> References: <83fwj5hlvt.fsf@gnu.org> <83ehyphlhq.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1317936181 27697 80.91.229.12 (6 Oct 2011 21:23:01 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 6 Oct 2011 21:23:01 +0000 (UTC) To: 6365-done@debbugs.gnu.org Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Oct 06 23:22:57 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1RBvP7-0001Bi-8j for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 06 Oct 2011 23:22:57 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34898 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RBvP6-0002kq-JD for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 06 Oct 2011 17:22:56 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:59632) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RBvP2-0002kU-R6 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 06 Oct 2011 17:22:54 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RBvP1-00021V-OG for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 06 Oct 2011 17:22:52 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:44499) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RBvP1-00021C-MP for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 06 Oct 2011 17:22:51 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RBvPB-0000r0-VZ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 06 Oct 2011 17:23:01 -0400 Resent-From: Glenn Morris Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2011 21:23:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: cc-closed 6365 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Mail-Followup-To: 6365@debbugs.gnu.org, rgm@gnu.org Original-Received: via spool by 6365-done@debbugs.gnu.org id=D6365.13179361733265 (code D ref 6365); Thu, 06 Oct 2011 21:23:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 6365-done) by debbugs.gnu.org; 6 Oct 2011 21:22:53 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RBvP3-0000qb-Ik for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 06 Oct 2011 17:22:53 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([140.186.70.10]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1RBvP1-0000qT-Rz for 6365-done@debbugs.gnu.org; Thu, 06 Oct 2011 17:22:52 -0400 Original-Received: from rgm by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1RBvOq-0004PY-Fq; Thu, 06 Oct 2011 17:22:40 -0400 X-Spook: AFSPC data haven Ft. Knox industrial intelligence NASA X-Ran: [dR=MT_{yfVgcOr#HCFIUV5sYTRES4Wu{yy7@e@d6*V~CPHy_g8+k/J&.I]m[zdIj~/\y' X-Hue: red X-Attribution: GM In-Reply-To: <83ehyphlhq.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Thu, 06 Oct 2011 23:13:21 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus (www.gnus.org), GNU Emacs (www.gnu.org/software/emacs/) X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Thu, 06 Oct 2011 17:23:01 -0400 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 1) X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:52320 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-devel/2010-06/msg00164.html >> >> AFAIU, the conclusion was that there are no evident optimizations, and >> that only profiling the current code against an alternative can tell >> which one is better. >> >> FWIW, I don't plan working o this any time soon. > > Oh, and I did convert 2 members of `struct bidi_it' from `int's to > 1-bit fields. OK; doesn't seem worth keeping this open as a bug then.