From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#9571: 24.0.50; user option to turn off bidi, please Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 13:18:25 +0300 Message-ID: <834o03sgsu.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87obybg01n.fsf@gmail.com> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1316773187 5095 80.91.229.12 (23 Sep 2011 10:19:47 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 10:19:47 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 9571@debbugs.gnu.org To: =?UTF-8?Q?=C5=A0t=C4=9Bp=C3=A1n_?= =?UTF-8?Q?N=C4=9Bmec?= Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Sep 23 12:19:43 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 1R72r8-0001gb-N9 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 12:19:43 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:34111 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R72r8-0006fw-3A for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 06:19:42 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:54150) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R72r4-0006fr-Va for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 06:19:40 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R72r3-0002C7-RC for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 06:19:38 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:43724) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R72r3-0002C0-OI for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 06:19:37 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R72rS-0007am-IG for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 06:20:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 10:20:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 9571 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: wontfix Original-Received: via spool by 9571-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B9571.131677319629169 (code B ref 9571); Fri, 23 Sep 2011 10:20:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 9571) by debbugs.gnu.org; 23 Sep 2011 10:19:56 +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 1R72rL-0007aQ-MM for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 06:19:56 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout22.012.net.il ([80.179.55.172]) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1R72rI-0007aG-8u for 9571@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 06:19:53 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout22.012.net.il by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LRZ00A000MFO300@a-mtaout22.012.net.il> for 9571@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 13:19:24 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.228.8.215]) by a-mtaout22.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LRZ009LA0OBRLM0@a-mtaout22.012.net.il>; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 13:19:24 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: <87obybg01n.fsf@gmail.com> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.11 Precedence: list Resent-Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 06:20:02 -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:51697 Archived-At: > From: =C5=A0t=C4=9Bp=C3=A1n N=C4=9Bmec > =09 > Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 10:01:08 +0200 > Cc: 9571@debbugs.gnu.org >=20 > On Fri, 23 Sep 2011 06:11:16 +0200 > Stefan Monnier wrote: >=20 > >> Can you imagine that there are some Emacs users who do not _ever= _ need > >> or want to edit bidirectional text? > > > > If those users get a different behavior depending on > > bidi-display-reordering, then we have a bug. >=20 > I assume you don't consider UI responsiveness (buffer movement etc.= ) > deterioration a bug, then? Yes, I do. Please report them as much as possible, so they could be debugged and fixed. > AFIAK it's totally unrealistic to expect the same responsiveness > from Emacs with bidi enabled as from one with bidi disabled No, it's not unrealistic. In a vast majority of cases, the differenc= e in responsiveness is below the threshold of human perception. If it were not for that, we would have much more complaints about the new display. Where it exceeds that threshold, i.e. it becomes annoyingly slow (whatever "annoyingly" means for you), please report that as a bug with a clear test case. Without reporting such incidents, there'= s no way we can get the new display better as fast as needed, which I hope is what everyone here wants. > just as is the case with font locking. This analogy is invalid, because font-lock is a very different beast. For starters, it works on the entire buffer, while bidi is display-only feature, and thus operates only on the (small) portion o= f the buffer being displayed. > OTOH, I understand you probably just want to push bidi down everybo= dy's > throat No one around here has such a nasty attitude. I'm appalled that you can even suggest such a possibility. The bidi display was designed and implemented to be fast enough to be tolerable by people even if they don't use any R2L scripts. Where the reality flies at the face of this design or implementation, there's a bug that needs to be fixed. But it's impossible to fix them if they are not reported, because Emacs display features are a million, and no single living person can envision every use case in a lifetime. > the argumentation so far seems a bit disingenuous to me. They are the truth nonetheless. The old unidirectional display was left in place only as a debugging aid. Like any other basic feature of the display engine, it will one day become the only way to display text in Emacs, because maintaining two separate code bases, and in th= e display engine at that, is a serious maintenance burden. Introducing a user-level variable to use the unidirectional display will be a tremendous obstacle when we would like to get rid of the old code, I hope at least that much is clear and agreed.