From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: David Kastrup Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Inefficient code in reftex-index.el Date: Tue, 07 Jun 2005 16:35:10 +0200 Message-ID: <858y1mxmjl.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> References: <85slzv7j87.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <858y1n2g75.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1118155250 25973 80.91.229.2 (7 Jun 2005 14:40:50 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 7 Jun 2005 14:40:50 +0000 (UTC) Cc: dominik@science.uva.nl, emacs-devel@gnu.org, "Kim F. Storm" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Jun 07 16:40:42 2005 Return-path: Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DffBB-0002fe-3j for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 07 Jun 2005 16:35:45 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DffHh-0002g9-NT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 07 Jun 2005 10:42:29 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DffGz-0002PC-Lr for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Jun 2005 10:41:45 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1DffGx-0002OC-P6 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Jun 2005 10:41:44 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1DffGx-0002LG-Lo for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Jun 2005 10:41:43 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.164] (helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1DffF3-0000m4-Az for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 07 Jun 2005 10:39:45 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lola.goethe.zz) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.34) id 1Dff9u-0001p5-HL; Tue, 07 Jun 2005 10:34:26 -0400 Original-Received: by lola.goethe.zz (Postfix, from userid 1002) id 1195E1C3DFFF; Tue, 7 Jun 2005 16:35:10 +0200 (CEST) Original-To: rms@gnu.org In-Reply-To: (Richard Stallman's message of "Tue, 07 Jun 2005 10:28:21 -0400") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:38258 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:38258 Richard Stallman writes: > In any case, to me, the match-data interface should not be considered > a user-level feature _at all_. > > I don't agree. It is legitimate for user code to call match-data > directly. There is no reason for the changes people are proposing. Problem is that markers slow down editing, and significantly so. And normal editing operations are not associated with extensive consing, so they won't trigger frequent garbage collection. It is not good that save-match-data leaves markers lying around, and there is little evidence that user code using match-data is written with the issues in mind. Providing ways to deal with the issues right with the functions themselves might make it both more obvious and convenient to people to recognize and do the right thing. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum