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.devel Subject: Re: jit-lock-antiblink-grace Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2019 17:23:56 +0300 Message-ID: <83tv8em48z.fsf@gnu.org> References: <834l0enw8c.fsf@gnu.org> <83y2xqm6m4.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="195606"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" Cc: joaotavora@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 12 16:24:50 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1iJIK9-000omc-Gj for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 12 Oct 2019 16:24:49 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33536 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iJIK8-0006HB-9D for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 12 Oct 2019 10:24:48 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:40356) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iJIJU-0006GG-K9 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Oct 2019 10:24:11 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:39170) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iJIJU-0001YR-4R; Sat, 12 Oct 2019 10:24:08 -0400 Original-Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=4389 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1iJIJS-0003j8-Sr; Sat, 12 Oct 2019 10:24:07 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Stefan Monnier on Sat, 12 Oct 2019 10:13:42 -0400) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:240917 Archived-At: > From: Stefan Monnier > Cc: João Távora , > emacs-devel@gnu.org > Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2019 10:13:42 -0400 > > > We also have display-related hooks. If you could use one of them, > > that might be better, because one could generally type quite a few > > commands before redisplay kicks in, and post-command-hook runs once > > for every command. > > Really? AFAIK we redisplay at the end of every command executed. No, we do that only if there's no other event in the event queue. > We additionally redisplay after processing filters and after receiving > an event that turned out to be a prefix key, etc... Filters run only when Emacs is idle, so they don't run when there are keyboard events in the queue. > So, AFAICT we generally redisplay at least as often as we run > post-command-hook. I don't think this is correct, not AFAIR. > The only case where we don't is when we can't keep up with the input > events in which case we skip redisplay, but that's the case where > we're *already* too slow. My point is that post-command-hook might be called more often than once per redisplay cycle, and I think we agree on that, right? > > It's a backward-incompatible behavior, and is not being developed due > > to bug reports, > > It was developed because people like Alan are so bothered by the > flashing that they're going through lengths to find other ways to > avoid it. I'm not saying this is not a useful feature, and I'm not objecting to its inclusion. I'm asking why do we need to turn it on by default right when we introduce it. > > so why make it the default right from the start? It also slows down > > cursor motion (which should probably be in the doc string as well). > > It shouldn't slow down cursor motion, normally (at least not in any > measurable way). Font lock does slow down Emacs, so calling it in more cases/places will do so as well. > > I still don't think I understand what would constitute an > > "unterminated string at EOL", then. Could you show two examples, one > > where there is such a string, the other where there isn't? > > Code like: > > var x = "foo y = "bar"; > > where the user is in the middle of writing `x = "foobar";` but hasn't yet > closed the string. Yes, and what is the other example I asked for, where we don't have an unterminated string at EOL due to such editing?