From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs rewrite in a maintainable language Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 18:14:39 +0300 Message-ID: <83bnc2ztpc.fsf@gnu.org> References: <561A19AB.5060001@cumego.com> <87io6dl0h0.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87lhb82qxc.fsf@gmail.com> <87oag4jk74.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87k2qrki45.fsf@wanadoo.es> <83oag3oosv.fsf@gnu.org> <6909324d6de8929192a27fc0be8267d4@mail.iq.pl> <87pp0jcbp8.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1444749326 4131 80.91.229.3 (13 Oct 2015 15:15:26 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:15:26 +0000 (UTC) Cc: esperanto@cumego.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Tassilo Horn Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 13 17:15:16 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm1IJ-0007BI-UL for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 17:15:16 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:36772 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm1II-0001Vi-L0 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 11:15:14 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:41359) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm1Hb-0001Q3-G9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 11:14:32 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm1HW-0000S3-9T for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 11:14:31 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout27.012.net.il ([80.179.55.183]:40546) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm1HW-0000Rp-0t; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 11:14:26 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.mtaout27.012.net.il by mtaout27.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NW500E00ZH3GM00@mtaout27.012.net.il>; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 18:10:24 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.94.185.246]) by mtaout27.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NW500A2VZHC8S40@mtaout27.012.net.il>; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 18:10:24 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: <87pp0jcbp8.fsf@gnu.org> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 80.179.55.183 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:191472 Archived-At: > From: Tassilo Horn > Cc: Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 12:19:47 +0200 > > Yes, they are all a bit logy in general but there's one thing which they > (and any other editors I know of, say Vim, JEdit, gedit) do orders of > magnitude faster than Emacs: syntax highlighting. Of course, Emacs' > font-lock is better and much more flexible because it's implemented in > Lisp but it's painfully slow anyway. In which major modes is font-lock "painfully slow", in your experience? I only see with in C-derived languages.