From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#27103: Should show-trailing-whitespace highlight specified spaces? Date: Sun, 28 May 2017 21:14:50 +0300 Message-ID: <83wp90g86d.fsf@gnu.org> References: <8b0fc51c-288c-cf31-1054-07bd13ce91a0@live.com> <83poeugnqx.fsf@gnu.org> <83o9uegk7e.fsf@gnu.org> <0541b31f-46b4-e52f-9d58-d649809b940d@live.com> <837f11gd47.fsf@gnu.org> <209333a8-8106-0193-a237-bc54fc08b268@live.com> <83y3tgg9ks.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1495995317 978 195.159.176.226 (28 May 2017 18:15:17 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 28 May 2017 18:15:17 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 27103@debbugs.gnu.org To: =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit--Claudel Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun May 28 20:15:13 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dF2ie-000099-IB for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 28 May 2017 20:15:12 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:44842 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dF2ik-00012m-2D for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sun, 28 May 2017 14:15:18 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:36778) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dF2ia-0000yq-2S for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 28 May 2017 14:15:08 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dF2iV-000223-Fy for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 28 May 2017 14:15:08 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:39290) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dF2iV-00021w-C3 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 28 May 2017 14:15:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dF2iU-0004Y3-Mw for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sun, 28 May 2017 14:15:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Eli Zaretskii Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sun, 28 May 2017 18:15:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 27103 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: notabug Original-Received: via spool by 27103-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B27103.149599530117465 (code B ref 27103); Sun, 28 May 2017 18:15:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 27103) by debbugs.gnu.org; 28 May 2017 18:15:01 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41967 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dF2iT-0004Xd-4b for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 28 May 2017 14:15:01 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:45744) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1dF2iQ-0004XR-Vy for 27103@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 28 May 2017 14:14:59 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dF2iH-00020Q-57 for 27103@debbugs.gnu.org; Sun, 28 May 2017 14:14:53 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:47527) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1dF2iH-00020M-1W; Sun, 28 May 2017 14:14:49 -0400 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:4339 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1dF2iG-00088A-CQ; Sun, 28 May 2017 14:14:48 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from =?UTF-8?Q?Cl=C3=A9ment?= Pit--Claudel on Sun, 28 May 2017 13:53:09 -0400) 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: 208.118.235.43 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:132961 Archived-At: > Cc: 27103@debbugs.gnu.org > From: Clément Pit--Claudel > Date: Sun, 28 May 2017 13:53:09 -0400 > > > But this again asks that the display engine could produce 2 different > > display elements out of the same buffer position, which means it would > > need to scan that buffer position twice. Right? > > Possibly — I don't think I understand this part well. What happens for before-string properties? There's a string there, so those properties are processed when the display engine traverses the string characters. > Could the same thing happen here? No, because there's no string. There's just buffer text and nothing else. Maybe we could extend the line-prefix property to support left-fringe and right-fringe specs. > > Are overlays really so slow that you are prepared to jump through such > > hoops? > > Definitely :) I need these markers for a literate-programming buffer where roughly every other line has a marker. On a 10k lines file, overlays are entirely impractical. Can you show a simple example where having 5K overlays in a buffer cause significant slowdown? I mean, just having 5K overlays, without any additional bells and whistles. What exactly is slowed down?