From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Tassilo Horn Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs rewrite in a maintainable language Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 21:45:44 +0200 Message-ID: <87k2qqtuvr.fsf@gnu.org> References: <561A19AB.5060001@cumego.com> <87io6dl0h0.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87lhb82qxc.fsf@gmail.com> <87oag4jk74.fsf@wanadoo.es> <87k2qrki45.fsf@wanadoo.es> <83oag3oosv.fsf@gnu.org> <6909324d6de8929192a27fc0be8267d4@mail.iq.pl> <87pp0jcbp8.fsf@gnu.org> <83bnc2ztpc.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1444765655 13635 80.91.229.3 (13 Oct 2015 19:47:35 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 13 Oct 2015 19:47:35 +0000 (UTC) Cc: esperanto@cumego.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 13 21:47:25 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm5Xf-0000Ao-PL for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 21:47:23 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39078 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm5Xf-0001CX-6F for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:47:23 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54746) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm5WC-00005J-9t for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:45:53 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm5W8-0005WK-NV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:45:52 -0400 Original-Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.25]:47510) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Zm5W8-0005W9-IA for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:45:48 -0400 Original-Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 59A1820ACB for ; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:45:48 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from frontend1 ([10.202.2.160]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:45:48 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-sasl-enc:x-sasl-enc; s=smtpout; bh=fZGvZBtChaogaTt OntwJ1ORnMRY=; b=my+1sKe9buLs/AYexVnBPZGcJkhGntTBz5e/5CxSd95zlB/ f13LD/Ww3pNfTdoFGnihKAdqDSUpEPL6XFQYRfANils3HiMLzp90Dg3N8diUT1aN w1Z/942GVS4JWzU88nkbmlmU/TyzWVMzit6Bwu81ggpMqCjDiNDg5Dl8ecLc= X-Sasl-enc: t43kD0HZmpEeO4ilKwnKJICtUBJ/9mJgCW2qV+5q2iAW 1444765547 Original-Received: from thinkpad-t440p (unknown [2.161.224.28]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 0A043C0001E; Tue, 13 Oct 2015 15:45:46 -0400 (EDT) Mail-Followup-To: Eli Zaretskii , esperanto@cumego.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org In-Reply-To: <83bnc2ztpc.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Tue, 13 Oct 2015 18:14:39 +0300") User-Agent: Gnus/5.130014 (Ma Gnus v0.14) Emacs/25.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 66.111.4.25 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:191508 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> Yes, they are all a bit logy in general but there's one thing which >> they (and any other editors I know of, say Vim, JEdit, gedit) do >> orders of magnitude faster than Emacs: syntax highlighting. Of >> course, Emacs' font-lock is better and much more flexible because >> it's implemented in Lisp but it's painfully slow anyway. > > In which major modes is font-lock "painfully slow", in your > experience? I only see with in C-derived languages. Yes, C-derived modes are definitely the worst in that respect but I also experience this problem with AUCTeX font-latex.el. There the fontification rules aren't that complex but there are a simply a lot of rules. I sometimes also have slowdowns in elisp-mode and clojure-mode but there I think it's not the fault of font-lock but rather some minor-mode hooking into `post-command-hook'. I likely suspect could be `aggressive-indent-mode' but I haven't profiled that yet because it happens only sporadically. So what I intended to say in the "performance matters or not" debate is that it probably doesn=E2=80=99t matter too much except for evaluating Elis= p. Bye, Tassilo