From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Miles Bader Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Default of jit-lock-stealth-time Date: Tue, 27 Feb 2007 08:19:45 +0900 Message-ID: <87ejocik1a.fsf@catnip.gol.com> References: <85tzxazb8r.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> <87ps7x4clj.fsf@pacem.orebokech.com> <85irdpweuq.fsf@lola.goethe.zz> Reply-To: Miles Bader NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1172532016 3385 80.91.229.12 (26 Feb 2007 23:20:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 26 Feb 2007 23:20:16 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Stefan Monnier Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Feb 27 00:20:09 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 1HLp8V-0001iX-AT for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 27 Feb 2007 00:20:03 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HLp8V-00005k-9a for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 26 Feb 2007 18:20:03 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HLp8J-00005X-GP for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Feb 2007 18:19:51 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1HLp8H-00005L-2Q for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Feb 2007 18:19:50 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1HLp8G-00005I-WB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Feb 2007 18:19:49 -0500 Original-Received: from smtp02.dentaku.gol.com ([203.216.5.72]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA:32) (Exim 4.52) id 1HLp8E-0006if-6T; Mon, 26 Feb 2007 18:19:46 -0500 Original-Received: from 203-216-97-073.dsl.gol.ne.jp ([203.216.97.73] helo=catnip.gol.com) by smtp02.dentaku.gol.com with esmtpa (Dentaku) id 1HLp8B-0006dA-69; Tue, 27 Feb 2007 08:19:43 +0900 Original-Received: by catnip.gol.com (Postfix, from userid 1000) id B96082F4A; Tue, 27 Feb 2007 08:19:45 +0900 (JST) System-Type: i686-pc-linux-gnu In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Mon\, 26 Feb 2007 16\:34\:05 -0500") Original-Lines: 16 X-Abuse-Complaints: abuse@gol.com X-detected-kernel: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) 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:66885 Archived-At: Stefan Monnier writes: > This doesn't answer the question: have you *observed* *benefits*? That's a rather silly question though, given that the whole purpose of stealth fontification is to make fontification of large source files more "seamless" -- i.e., unobservable... I've never changed the default, and never noticed any delay or adverse effects; occasionally it causes my system to not be idle when I thought it should be idle (why should I care though?). -Miles -- "Most attacks seem to take place at night, during a rainstorm, uphill, where four map sheets join." -- Anon. British Officer in WW I