From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#32729: Xemacs 23 times as fast as GNU Emacs Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2019 11:18:03 +0300 Message-ID: <83blujkaf8.fsf@gnu.org> References: <871rviobu2.fsf@gnus.org> <83imouo1jp.fsf@gnu.org> <87y2xplufp.fsf@gnus.org> <83r23hkqr3.fsf@gnu.org> <87sgnwbl8w.fsf@gnus.org> Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="65305"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: layer@franz.com, benjamin.benninghofen@airbus.com, 32729@debbugs.gnu.org, 32728@debbugs.gnu.org To: Lars Ingebrigtsen Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Oct 14 10:19:17 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iJvZV-000Gs0-2S for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 10:19:17 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45580 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iJvZT-0007n9-LF for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 04:19:15 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:52390) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iJvZH-0007lu-QM for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 04:19:04 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iJvZG-00041C-Ma for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 04:19:03 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:57472) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iJvZG-000418-KQ for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 04:19:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iJvZG-0003za-Eu for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 04:19:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2019 08:19:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 32729 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 32729-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B32729.157104109915278 (code B ref 32729); Mon, 14 Oct 2019 08:19:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 32729) by debbugs.gnu.org; 14 Oct 2019 08:18:19 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:38059 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iJvYZ-0003yG-EV for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 04:18:19 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:43228) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1iJvYW-0003xw-Rc; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 04:18:17 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:48753) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iJvYR-0002uA-Bd; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 04:18:11 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=2756 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1iJvYQ-0001me-8H; Mon, 14 Oct 2019 04:18:10 -0400 In-reply-to: <87sgnwbl8w.fsf@gnus.org> (message from Lars Ingebrigtsen on Sun, 13 Oct 2019 19:36:47 +0200) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 209.51.188.43 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:169241 Archived-At: > From: Lars Ingebrigtsen > Cc: benjamin.benninghofen@airbus.com, layer@franz.com, > 32729@debbugs.gnu.org, 32728@debbugs.gnu.org > Date: Sun, 13 Oct 2019 19:36:47 +0200 > > So this is the design I want to do: > > process-add-callback PROCESS FUNCTION > process-remove-callback PROCESS FUNCTION > > FUNCTION takes three parameters: The PROCESS and the start/end of the > region inserted. Perhaps it would make sense to do something with the > return values -- if the function returns non-nil, then further callbacks > are inhibited? I don't understand what would trigger these callbacks, and how do you specify the region in advance, without knowing what will be inserted. Without understanding this, I don't think I see the utility, and most important: why this would be faster. > > However, I would begin by measuring the effect of this resizing on the > > time it takes to receive large amounts of data. Maybe other factors > > make this part negligible. > > Sure. My simple dd test (without a filter) surprised me by being as > fast as it was, so Emacs was able to grow that buffer quicker than I > expected. But it's also a pretty simple test case -- I can try to see > what happens if I call enlarge_buffer_text to 1GB first and see what the > effects are. Btw, unlike what I originally implied, the default filter also receives a Lisp string, so the question why by default reading dd output is so much faster than when you define a non-default filter function still stands.