From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Display slowness that is painful Date: Fri, 03 Feb 2006 18:01:52 -0500 Message-ID: <878xssm4oz.fsf-monnier+emacs@gnu.org> References: <87slr5c78p.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <877j8fx43q.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87mzhaqp7p.fsf@stupidchicken.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1139016644 18706 80.91.229.2 (4 Feb 2006 01:30:44 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 4 Feb 2006 01:30:44 +0000 (UTC) Cc: cyd@stupidchicken.com, rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Feb 04 02:30:40 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1F5CG5-0007LA-TR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 04 Feb 2006 02:30:38 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1F5CJH-0003Fh-An for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 03 Feb 2006 20:33:55 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1F59zT-0005kA-4y for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Feb 2006 18:05:19 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1F59zQ-0005dg-AV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Feb 2006 18:05:18 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1F59zP-0005cU-SK for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 03 Feb 2006 18:05:15 -0500 Original-Received: from [209.226.175.25] (helo=tomts5-srv.bellnexxia.net) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1F59yR-00026C-4f; Fri, 03 Feb 2006 18:04:15 -0500 Original-Received: from alfajor ([67.71.25.142]) by tomts5-srv.bellnexxia.net (InterMail vM.5.01.06.13 201-253-122-130-113-20050324) with ESMTP id <20060203230152.NEVQ17035.tomts5-srv.bellnexxia.net@alfajor>; Fri, 3 Feb 2006 18:01:52 -0500 Original-Received: by alfajor (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 6B5BAD7466; Fri, 3 Feb 2006 18:01:52 -0500 (EST) Original-To: storm@cua.dk (Kim F. Storm) In-Reply-To: (Kim F. Storm's message of "Fri, 03 Feb 2006 11:00:22 +0100") 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:49989 Archived-At: > Perhaps we should have some form of timer associated with the > (default) redisplay-dont-pause == nil case, so that even if > input_pending, we will still update the display if the last completed > redisplay happened more than, say 2 seconds ago. We should probably do the usual "competitive analysis": keep track of the amount of time thrown away because redisplay got interrupted, and when the sum gets higher than the amount of time it would take to do a full redisplay, then force a full redisplay. This way we can guarantee we're within a factor 2 of the optimal setting for redisplay-dont-pause. Stefan PS: Of course, we maybe don't know how much time a full redisplay would take and we probably don't want to keep track of actual time anyway, only some estimate of "amount of work".