bug#70036: a fix that

[Theodor Thornhill via "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>]

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> Date: Thu, 18 Apr 2024 23:32:00 +0200
>> From: Theodor Thornhill <theo@thornhill.no>
>> Cc: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>, felician.nemeth@gmail.com,
>>  70036@debbugs.gnu.org
>> 
>> I'll add two profiles, one is profile-fast and profile-slow. You can
>> guess which is which :)
>> 
>> STEPS:
>> I've made an intentionally broken commit into a golang repo I just
>> forked, to get some publishDiagnostics quickly.
>> 
>> (for good measure evaluate eglot.el before running profiles)
>> 
>> 1. Install gopls
>> 2. Make some directory you can wipe out after the test and cd into it
>> 3. git clone git@github.com:theothornhill/gin.git foo/bar/baz/foo/bar/baz/foo/bar/baz/foo/bar/baz/gin
>> 4. cd foo/bar/baz/foo/bar/baz/foo/bar/baz/foo/bar/baz/gin
>> 5. open fs.go in emacs and make sure some go mode is available. Go-ts-mode for example
>> 6. M-x profiler-start
>> 7. M-x eglot
>> 8. Wait 10-20 seconds. Do no actions other than let the lsp settle.
>> 9. M-x profiler-stop
>> 10. M-x profiler-report
>> 11. Rinse repeat with both or all variants of emacs with/without the
>> latest eglot changes.
>> I'll add my profiles, and let some metrics talk.
>
> Thanks, but that is not what I asked to provide, for us to make a
> decision in this case.  I asked to provide results of a benchmark-run
> or similar measure of the run time.  Profiles, by contrast, are much
> harder to interpret when the issue is the overall time it takes to
> perform some operations.
>
> Could you please show benchmark times of the old code (before your
> changes), the code after your changes, and the current code in Git
> (after João reverted your change and installed his own improvements)?
> This will allow us to see the times (both processing and GC) of each
> variant, and will allow to compare their performance.
>
> Thanks.

I'll try.

Theo