From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: new emacs24 settings (was: Re: Performance problems (CPU 100%) with NULs in files) Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 22:02:37 +0300 Message-ID: <83ipojqdyq.fsf@gnu.org> References: <83obybqiv0.fsf@gnu.org> <83litfqgwx.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1316804541 341 80.91.229.12 (23 Sep 2011 19:02:21 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 23 Sep 2011 19:02:21 +0000 (UTC) To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Sep 23 21:02:17 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-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 1R7B0q-0005Ws-JF for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 21:02:16 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49940 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R7B0p-0002YO-OY for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 15:02:15 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:45453) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R7B0k-0002Xp-Ql for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 15:02:11 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R7B0j-0002XQ-DG for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 15:02:10 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il ([80.179.55.166]:43439) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1R7B0j-0002XA-6o for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 15:02:09 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0LRZ00M00OPD1T00@a-mtaout20.012.net.il> for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 22:01:25 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.228.8.215]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0LRZ00LNHOUCJW43@a-mtaout20.012.net.il> for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 23 Sep 2011 22:01:25 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 (beta) X-Received-From: 80.179.55.166 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:82314 Archived-At: > Date: Sat, 24 Sep 2011 02:32:24 +0800 > From: Le Wang > Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org > > > [1:text/plain Hide] > > On Sat, Sep 24, 2011 at 1:58 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > > > > > next-line > > What was the value of line-move-visual? Under the default non-nil > > setting, next-line is pretty expensive. > > > > it was t, setting it to nil didn't help bibi-display much. > > > > > > What kind of text? What was the major mode in that buffer? > > > > > > emacs-lisp large file > > > > How large? > > > > > allout.el >200k not very large. large enough to scroll continuously for 10 > seconds of so. > > Does it matter whether you are close to the file's beginning or to its > > end? > > > > Does anything change if, after visiting the file, you first type > > > > M-: (font-lock-default-fontify-buffer) RET > > > and only then try scrolling? > > > > no. > > > > > I also use full font-lock salad colors with "Consolas" font on Windows. > > > Also I use several minor-modes that add pre or post-command-hooks. > > > > If you remove those pre/post-command hooks, does the scrolling speed > > improve significantly? Can you find a hook that has the most profound > > effect? > > > no it does not. the effect of all hooks is about 2-3% CPU. > > > > Does it behave better if you set redisplay-dont-pause to a non-nil > > > > value? This will be the default in Emacs 24. > > > > > > > > > > It's not making a noticeable difference. > > > > With or without bidi-display-reordering? I asked about its effect > > when bidi-display-reordering is left at its default t value. > > > > I tried it with bidi and without, difference wasn't huge. What you tell is very strange, because any reason I could think of are contradicted by one or more of your answers. Please file a bug report with the following info: . your full .emacs file (assuming the problem is not visible in "emacs -Q"; if it is, no need for .emacs) . the name of some Lisp file that is part of Emacs which exhibits a similar slowdown, and that slowdown disappears when you turn off bidi-display-reordering. alternatively, if you can post the specific Lisp file you used in this testing, that'd be best. With this info, I can look into the problem and see what causes it. Thanks in advance.