From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lars Ingebrigtsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: bug#20703: BUG 20703 further evidence Date: Tue, 25 Aug 2020 11:13:08 +0200 Message-ID: <875z97dr6j.fsf@gnus.org> References: <5ab4af6b-5b7d-40f9-b49f-2d8cc6926e9f@googlegroups.com> <5696C0CC.9010300@yandex.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="19706"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Sam Halliday , 20703@debbugs.gnu.org, help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org To: Dmitry Gutov Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Aug 25 11:13:35 2020 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kAV1L-00052H-Mw for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 11:13:35 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:37638 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kAV1K-0001ow-PP for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 05:13:34 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:40210) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kAV13-0001og-Cn for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 05:13:17 -0400 Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([2a01:4f9:2b:f0f::2]:56714) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kAV11-0005AK-Kh for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 05:13:17 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnus.org; s=20200322; h=Content-Type:MIME-Version:Message-ID:In-Reply-To:Date: References:Subject:Cc:To:From:Sender:Reply-To:Content-Transfer-Encoding: Content-ID:Content-Description:Resent-Date:Resent-From:Resent-Sender: Resent-To:Resent-Cc:Resent-Message-ID:List-Id:List-Help:List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe:List-Post:List-Owner:List-Archive; bh=hzzNNTwzOUf49wDZffulLmJ/w/wky/wyKfc6f0lVYFo=; b=oj+N3oN1dKqb7JH2hUaAADOiCf tD0b9uLhcx8XV0NPuPCL3eGhxno+qH349nIbdZjb/01Em5hLk+bYOoPpjy+O3oBC8GuxS24mPnD6i ehCHzfO1XOVsNIaSYkRvy9gTb0TYvp1rS/T0VvOJQAfdCGgZvgWs3q3SkoD0jeGRm+cI=; Original-Received: from cm-84.212.202.86.getinternet.no ([84.212.202.86] helo=xo) by quimby with esmtpsa (TLS1.3:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1kAV0w-0003bS-CW; Tue, 25 Aug 2020 11:13:12 +0200 X-Now-Playing: Jim O'Rourke's _To Magnetize Money and Return a Roving Eye (2)_: "To Magnetize Money and Return a Roving Eye pt2" In-Reply-To: <5696C0CC.9010300@yandex.ru> (Dmitry Gutov's message of "Thu, 14 Jan 2016 00:25:32 +0300") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a01:4f9:2b:f0f::2; envelope-from=larsi@gnus.org; helo=quimby.gnus.org X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: No matching host in p0f cache. That's all we know. X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "help-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.help:123760 Archived-At: Dmitry Gutov writes: >> I'm triggering the error in an extremely long line of code (46,000 >> characters!). [...] > - re-search-forward with limit, as implemented in the patch below > (against emacs-25), that might work against problematic files like > that (I haven't tested it). > > I don't really know if we should install it, though, because it adds a > performance overhead of ~10%. And I don't know if this problem is > common enough. I think this is a use case (46K long lines) that's really obscure, and a 10% performance it wouldn't be appropriate. > Because another way to combat it is at the source: through judicious > application of --exclude argument. As a bonus, the generation phase > will become faster as well (sometimes dramatically). > > Should we add a validation phase to visit-tags-table instead? Like, > one that would say "your TAGS files contains obviously malformed > entries from file XXX.min.js, go back and ignore it"? If that can be done efficiently, then that sounds like a good idea. Otherwise, perhaps we should just say that etags just doesn't support 46K long line source files and close this report as a wontfix? -- (domestic pets only, the antidote for overdose, milk.) bloggy blog: http://lars.ingebrigtsen.no