From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Jambunathan K Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.help Subject: Re: Handling large files with Emacs Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 19:21:32 +0530 Message-ID: <87objsou57.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87k3uhf0gc.fsf@panzer.v.cablecom.net> <87a9vdeyrf.fsf@panzer.v.cablecom.net> <83objsc47x.fsf@gnu.org> <876260cji8.fsf@gmail.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1351086600 5831 80.91.229.3 (24 Oct 2012 13:50:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 24 Oct 2012 13:50:00 +0000 (UTC) Cc: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org To: Tom Original-X-From: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Oct 24 15:50:08 2012 Return-path: Envelope-to: geh-help-gnu-emacs@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 1TR1LT-0000r0-4y for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 24 Oct 2012 15:50:07 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:45885 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TR1LL-0004gO-Bt for geh-help-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 24 Oct 2012 09:49:59 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:38383) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TR1LA-0004fG-LQ for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Oct 2012 09:49:54 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TR1L1-0000mX-59 for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Oct 2012 09:49:48 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-pb0-f41.google.com ([209.85.160.41]:45771) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1TR1L0-0000mQ-VA for help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Wed, 24 Oct 2012 09:49:39 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-pb0-f41.google.com with SMTP id rq2so1287450pbb.0 for ; Wed, 24 Oct 2012 06:49:37 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=QZHv206dywOb6aOLqCuqHeMfsYTyggcPL/vxc6L5WPw=; b=NP21ek/CtxuIuBp1FfsLRW9d15JjiP13ktKuNFduQWbj2g77T7ORIF66hbgoEqERFh AT+WtsY2o2YENhRIlS6u0vHL+BCgF/oUo4HVaA5uVciJPdMgw5/dzBV+RxW6vkKRDlLG t7wK+Cw2A91LT4KdiG+VV1QtCurL67DdnkFQDe5ULnErLRggXzZQBJ626+kiWFqD+hSY LvJ5PdZQKhWjD20zWnggWa4JYScw4vUdMuX20jSwHhk7YdMtS5HDVarnt9QdSitJu9+x dTVeq43WQMsYe0MlsR2T8dkeMSPVpFt4w9BTlWCJ9uoPFJZvvgiTjVIHQcd00TfFLAPJ WMpA== Original-Received: by 10.66.78.69 with SMTP id z5mr44342403paw.14.1351086577686; Wed, 24 Oct 2012 06:49:37 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from debian-6.05 ([101.62.38.227]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id j8sm9523269paz.30.2012.10.24.06.49.35 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Wed, 24 Oct 2012 06:49:37 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: (Tom's message of "Wed, 24 Oct 2012 09:40:18 +0000 (UTC)") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.2.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 209.85.160.41 X-BeenThere: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: help-gnu-emacs-bounces+geh-help-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.help:87393 Archived-At: Tom writes: > Jambunathan K gmail.com> writes: > >> >> Have you experimented with `font-lock-maximum-size' together with >> `font-lock-support-mode'? >> >> ,----[ C-h v font-lock-maximum-size RET ] >> | font-lock-maximum-size is a variable defined in `font-lock.el'. >> | Its value is 256000 >> | >> | This variable is obsolete since 24.1. >> | > > BTW, why is it obsolete? Does it mean it's unnecessary and the > size of the buffer should not be a problem? > > I have this default setting like above and font lock is turned > on in big buffers nevertheless. Read the docstring again. Kicks in only for specific settings of `font-lock-support-mode'. (I was confused as well, before I looked at re-read the docstring.) I am just another user. There is no overhead to experimenting with other settings and seeing whether there are differences in the behaviour. --