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: Default of jit-lock-stealth-time Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 23:02:49 +0100 Message-ID: <85ps7vgsxi.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> References: <85tzxazb8r.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <87ps7x4clj.fsf@pacem.orebokech.com> <85irdpweuq.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <87ejocik1a.fsf@catnip.gol.com> <85hct8ovog.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <85fy8riafz.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1172613834 14635 80.91.229.12 (27 Feb 2007 22:03:54 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 22:03:54 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 27 23:03:46 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1HMAQB-0002XI-Ob for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 27 Feb 2007 23:03:44 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HMAQB-0001qm-Nz for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 27 Feb 2007 17:03:43 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HMAPR-0001gU-Ho for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Feb 2007 17:02:57 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HMAPO-0001g7-4K for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Feb 2007 17:02:56 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HMAPN-0001g4-Uq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Feb 2007 17:02:54 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-in-10.arcor-online.net ([151.189.21.50]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.52) id 1HMAPM-0003fV-E4; Tue, 27 Feb 2007 17:02:52 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-in-01-z2.arcor-online.net (mail-in-06-z2.arcor-online.net [151.189.8.18]) by mail-in-10.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2F8222D58E3; Tue, 27 Feb 2007 23:02:51 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from mail-in-08.arcor-online.net (mail-in-08.arcor-online.net [151.189.21.48]) by mail-in-01-z2.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2599E5BD63; Tue, 27 Feb 2007 23:02:51 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: from lola.goethe.zz (dslb-084-061-055-100.pools.arcor-ip.net [84.61.55.100]) by mail-in-08.arcor-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id F1811225EB2; Tue, 27 Feb 2007 23:02:50 +0100 (CET) Original-Received: by lola.goethe.zz (Postfix, from userid 1002) id ADD141D17415; Tue, 27 Feb 2007 23:02:49 +0100 (CET) In-Reply-To: (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Tue\, 27 Feb 2007 23\:19\:27 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.94 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.4-2.6 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:66960 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org >> From: David Kastrup >> Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 21:59:12 +0100 >> >> > Inaccurate. First, font-lock was turned off by default in _all_ >> > versions of Emacs since its introduction (in v19.x, AFAIR). More >> > importantly, a large majority of users turned it on, >> >> I'd like to see some statistics supporting that. A large majority >> of users does not touch defaults, according to my experience. > > One evidence I can offer is the number of discussions between > developers where different people tried many times to convince > Richard to turn font-lock on by default. Where would have been the point in having it turned on by default if "a large majority of users" would turn it on manually, anyway? I see this rather as evidence that people did _not_ turn it on by default, and that Emacs' popularity suffered because of that. So I come to quite opposite conclusions given the same, indirect data. And I don't consider my conclusions at all contrived. Which would warrant more direct data before one comes to the conclusion that it is ok to inflict users with the bad results of stealth fontification. Personally, I find it a _large_ warning sign that a number of developers said they turned stealth fontification off because of bad effects, and not a _single_ one reported turning it back on again because of opposing bad effects. So we have _several_ reports of stealth fontification being deemed unacceptable to experienced Emacs users, and not a single report of having it turned off being deemed unacceptable. In addition, it is really _hard_ to find the culprit for the bad effects of stealth fontification. I have not been able to figure this out myself. And even though it is hard, several other developers _independently_ figured it out and disabled it. I think that calls for _very_ good evidence for large negative effects if it is turned off by default, and I have up to now (including this mail I reply to) failed to see anything I would consider to be even remotely close. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum