From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Noam Postavsky <npostavs@gmail.com> Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#36566: 27.0.50; debug is sometimes horribly slow Date: Tue, 10 Sep 2019 22:54:07 -0400 Message-ID: <87v9tza6gg.fsf@gmail.com> References: <87r26yvb4r.fsf@web.de> <871ryy2l1t.fsf@gmail.com> <87r26xjyon.fsf@web.de> <877e8llbzo.fsf@runbox.com> <8736ilaepu.fsf@runbox.com> <87h871u24i.fsf@gmail.com> <874l2vcrtn.fsf@runbox.com> <874l2eosa7.fsf@gmail.com> <87mufh8jj2.fsf@runbox.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="165255"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) Cc: Michael Heerdegen <michael_heerdegen@web.de>, 36566@debbugs.gnu.org, Stefan Monnier <monnier@IRO.UMontreal.CA> To: Gemini Lasswell <gazally@runbox.com> Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Sep 11 04:55:17 2019 Return-path: <bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org> Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from <bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>) id 1i7smr-000goc-69 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Wed, 11 Sep 2019 04:55:17 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:46154 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>) id 1i7smj-0007Z1-QY for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 22:55:09 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:36946) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1i7smd-0007Ys-AO for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 22:55:04 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1i7smc-00034U-98 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 22:55:03 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:33094) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1i7smc-00034O-5w for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 22:55:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1i7smc-0004XS-1z for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 22:55:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Noam Postavsky <npostavs@gmail.com> Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org> Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Wed, 11 Sep 2019 02:55:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: <handler.36566.B36566.156817045717389@debbugs.gnu.org> Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 36566 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 36566-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B36566.156817045717389 (code B ref 36566); Wed, 11 Sep 2019 02:55:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 36566) by debbugs.gnu.org; 11 Sep 2019 02:54:17 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41915 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1i7sls-0004WN-1b for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 22:54:17 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-io1-f65.google.com ([209.85.166.65]:46357) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from <npostavs@gmail.com>) id 1i7slq-0004WB-LG for 36566@debbugs.gnu.org; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 22:54:15 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-io1-f65.google.com with SMTP id d17so20523618ios.13 for <36566@debbugs.gnu.org>; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 19:54:14 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version; bh=3KOljMmLaoCu6IV9/10Ut6p7xdmaO5UrNmoFYucQPeg=; b=hQHeoRICI8dC/SKoGiwtblPlzvpUZiw2l0FAG6yeIkpccxlozN48Jl+23t+6jK2bkT VRqtfous6bwCEB8m9C1MAO1vbgDpUz2z02Il56jUQfbcJ3bLopwsS1YAX40Lnq/HK2Fk cL0XSyBgcyXMzJbVRNMYDh3LEChruGwAYxa/HnacYalc03c6vPVRYzdjiKQTNZ+z9vaS sBXOuuopk4gTOSg6RiCPNKZZr47xabNVCo7ycl77SzbKb+SsDOF78zxI4epwgHPtuk5A zqUfVoFKSEW1OnTGSS1h7a3QYVDglNXBrTHCgnr/XA2016Y4DFdHg7N+MC3BAbr6BnUp 9Z0Q== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version; bh=3KOljMmLaoCu6IV9/10Ut6p7xdmaO5UrNmoFYucQPeg=; b=B7/j3IHMsLWJlz3/cv0ekzaPgtD/XMBIB+fQbjYiGjLIQ06Q+pSIo1K68NH8RJSEda VFauQDtYuEEtH5tXoOp5GlsG1kEMEW01TIDszRNbPGUTP4P6iIvml0dvsDuUWiUJ6tpw V8aXZMDaBa9+OHsf1gUsVkAWYxEmqDdLkCIBjhyqB9cfGAROQ0fkmgnh6puIijetdzx1 OtPhMX0KF8Qw58cjQoWQTvKinyXezWbQVpi6pq9Hv1pCZfI5m1M5enfWRBhRL8ZSskaD mpMt47QaHkmCNgKQK51PMe47vMA5of9Mz0UZlceBUbLG1BUYK3xQtFIjmm3ijTswoBLj CyQw== X-Gm-Message-State: APjAAAViJea2ar4MyGQqb0Y8gTMS5s/o5mXaKfLTSQL/KnBHh8t/snVw YLiAWsCDy67fwe8TNc2I/kg= X-Google-Smtp-Source: APXvYqwdVHfslefqv+92f7pIXPqX9uDK9Z0zEeMcdd6SgrVCu/cdnKkrFBq/7US8YwsBCgt1uvTZ1g== X-Received: by 2002:a02:3b6f:: with SMTP id i47mr10133716jaf.24.1568170448897; Tue, 10 Sep 2019 19:54:08 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from minid (cbl-45-2-119-34.yyz.frontiernetworks.ca. [45.2.119.34]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e19sm12857002iom.57.2019.09.10.19.54.07 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-CHACHA20-POLY1305 bits=256/256); Tue, 10 Sep 2019 19:54:08 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <87mufh8jj2.fsf@runbox.com> (Gemini Lasswell's message of "Fri, 06 Sep 2019 09:41:05 -0700") X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 209.51.188.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs.gnu.org> List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/bug-gnu-emacs>, <mailto:bug-gnu-emacs-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe> List-Archive: <https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnu-emacs> List-Post: <mailto:bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org> List-Help: <mailto:bug-gnu-emacs-request@gnu.org?subject=help> List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnu-emacs>, <mailto:bug-gnu-emacs-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe> Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" <bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org> Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:166352 Archived-At: <http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.bugs/166352> Gemini Lasswell <gazally@runbox.com> writes: > Noam Postavsky <npostavs@gmail.com> writes: > >>> Subject: [PATCH 2/5] Improve performance of backtrace printing (bug#36566) >>> >>> * lisp/emacs-lisp/cl-print.el (cl-print-to-string-with-limit): Reduce >>> print-level and print-length more quickly when the structure being >>> printed is very large. >> >> Is this one still needed? I tried reverting it, and it seems to make no >> noticeable difference now (I didn't really measure though, I can't think >> of a straightforward way of doing that), at least for the case that >> Michael posted. > > My straightforward way of doing that is > > M-: (benchmark-run (revert-buffer)) RET > > while the backtrace buffer is current. I actually get 0.9 vs 1.3 seconds (the latter being with patch 2/5 reverted) with Michael's example, which is more of a difference than I expected based on my non-timed trials. > I tried, with and without the patch, these steps: > > Navigate to org-export--prune-tree in ox.el. > C-M-x to instrument it with Edebug. > Open a 150K org-mode file. > C-c C-e h H > Edebug to line 2728 of ox.el (inside the lambda bound to 'walk-data'). > Use 'd' to get a backtrace. > M-: (benchmark-run (revert-buffer)) RET > > With the patch: (0.594630583 9 0.31395808699999783) > Without the patch: (0.925387816 15 0.5158638049999986) > > I would expect that debugging deeper into org-mode export (so that there > are more frames to display containing the org parse tree) with a larger > org-mode file would exaggerate the difference. Alright, it's probably enough to justify this. > Edebug is very sluggish debugging org-export--prune-tree because it is > sending some 400K lines to the echo area, and then those make *Messages* > redisplay slow. I will work on another patch to improve Edebug's > behavior in this case. > >>> Subject: [PATCH 4/5] Create common tests for print.c and cl-print.el >> >> Extra colon. >> >>> Subject: [PATCH 5/5] Don't build print-number-table unless it will be used >> >> We try not to use hashes to reference commits >> > > I'll fix the patch comments as you suggest. Okay, there's nothing more from my side, so I guess you can go ahead and push when ready.