Re: Defun Self Documentation

Re: Defun Self Documentation

[Anders Munch]

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> Thanks for explaining your reasoning, but let's not forget that setting that to zero has a downside: if one types fast, it will slow down redisplay by delaying the response to the typing.

There is less work to do because it happens 0.125 seconds later?

I never noticed any slowdown.  Maybe it's mode-specific, some modes are slow at
finding the match?

> But of course, this is personal, which is why it is a user option.

Sure, but we were talking about the default, and the 0.1 seconds is an actual
scientific result.

regards, Anders

Re: Defun Self Documentation

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Anders Munch <ajm@flonidan.dk>
> Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 15:33:27 +0000
> 
> Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > Thanks for explaining your reasoning, but let's not forget that setting that to zero has a downside: if one types fast, it will slow down redisplay by delaying the response to the typing.
> 
> There is less work to do because it happens 0.125 seconds later?

No, because with zero value it happens immediately, and the extra work
required to show the overlay will slow down Emacs.

The display of the overlays to show the matching parentheses works
with an idle timer, and that value is the amount of time Emacs should
be idle before the parentheses are highlighted.  If you time fast,
Emacs will never be idle for that much time, so the parentheses will
not be highlighted while typing.  If you set the value to zero, the
parentheses will be highlighted no matter how fast you type, so Emacs
becomes less responsive to your typing.

> > But of course, this is personal, which is why it is a user option.
> 
> Sure, but we were talking about the default, and the 0.1 seconds is an actual
> scientific result.

I'm not sure the 0.1 number is relevant to this feature.  We are not
talking about the reaction time, we are talking about the shortest
time that indicates the user stopped typing.

Re: Defun Self Documentation

[Christopher Dimech]

> I'm not sure the 0.1 number is relevant to this feature.  We are not
> talking about the reaction time, we are talking about the shortest
> time that indicates the user stopped typing.

It all depends if the user would like to get the highliting every time
the cursor gets ta a parenthesis. It is therefore  understandable
not wanting highlithing contiually.

A solution would be a keybinding that cycles, so the hightlite can be
enabled when required.


> Sent: Friday, November 06, 2020 at 4:48 PM
> From: "Eli Zaretskii" <eliz@gnu.org>
> To: help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
> Subject: Re: Defun Self Documentation
>
> > From: Anders Munch <ajm@flonidan.dk>
> > Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2020 15:33:27 +0000
> >
> > Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > > Thanks for explaining your reasoning, but let's not forget that setting that to zero has a downside: if one types fast, it will slow down redisplay by delaying the response to the typing.
> >
> > There is less work to do because it happens 0.125 seconds later?
>
> No, because with zero value it happens immediately, and the extra work
> required to show the overlay will slow down Emacs.
>
> The display of the overlays to show the matching parentheses works
> with an idle timer, and that value is the amount of time Emacs should
> be idle before the parentheses are highlighted.  If you time fast,
> Emacs will never be idle for that much time, so the parentheses will
> not be highlighted while typing.  If you set the value to zero, the
> parentheses will be highlighted no matter how fast you type, so Emacs
> becomes less responsive to your typing.
>
> > > But of course, this is personal, which is why it is a user option.
> >
> > Sure, but we were talking about the default, and the 0.1 seconds is an actual
> > scientific result.
>
> I'm not sure the 0.1 number is relevant to this feature.  We are not
> talking about the reaction time, we are talking about the shortest
> time that indicates the user stopped typing.
>
>

Re: Defun Self Documentation

[Emanuel Berg via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor]

Eli, it seems all said and done, you ended up on the downside of
every single point you brought up against me.

I was right to move you to the clueless, away from the punk
fucker, list.

Except not entirely, as you did say

  (show-paren-mode t)

which I changed into the more correct

  (show-paren-mode 1)

hm ... maybe I should add that comment as a footnote?

-- 
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: Defun Self Documentation

[Emanuel Berg via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor]

> Except not entirely, as you did say
>
>   (show-paren-mode t)
>
> which I changed into the more correct
>
>   (show-paren-mode 1)

WAIT - or was it the other way around?

-- 
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Re: Defun Self Documentation

[Emanuel Berg via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor]

>> Except not entirely, as you did say
>>
>>   (show-paren-mode t)
>>
>> which I changed into the more correct
>>
>>   (show-paren-mode 1)
>
> WAIT - or was it the other way around?

I'm sorry Eli, because this unclarity we cannot rule you out from
the The Clueless Online Faculty. You stay on the list:

  https://dataswamp.org/~incal/CLUELESS-ONLINE

and, in the spirit of education, an Elisp version:

  (setq clueless-online-faculty '(eli-zaretskii))

-- 
underground experts united
http://user.it.uu.se/~embe8573
https://dataswamp.org/~incal

Beyond Kind Communication

[Corwin Brust]

In the spirit of open communication..

On Sun, Nov 8, 2020 at 10:39 PM Emanuel Berg via Users list for the
GNU Emacs text editor <help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org> wrote:

>   (setq clueless-online-faculty '(eli-zaretskii))

Other than hoping to score points with people who are frustrated by
our maintainer, what do you hope to gain by this display?

I must assume you cannot believe your technical points, whether
already raised or forthcoming, will be given more weight after you
reply to yourself three times in an hour, ending with the above.

Will you please tell us what you hope to achieve?

Is it your thought that Eli will offer to resign again?  I hope that
doesn't happen.  I hope that, as I have seen in the past, Eli will
adjust his style and approach based on the well-meaning and considered
inputs given to him by those who care foir Emacs and our community.

Will you please show some of that care, here?  I would like to know,
apart from your technical points, what virtue you see in sending such
as these messages to us all.  If hope that if you will take the
trouble to engage in a conversation about your frustrations and hopes
(as seperation from your specific technical asparations) we can yet
all learn something.

FWIW, I will read your messages whether you are rude to me or not, so
go ahead and say what you wish.  I'd like to find an opportunity from
this cluster-fuck of a "contribution".

In curiousity,
Corwin

"It is not enough to be Hungarian.  You must also have talent." -Steven Brust

Re: Defun Self Documentation

[Eric S Fraga]

Please stop.  Thank you.
-- 
Eric S Fraga via Emacs 28.0.50 & org 9.4 on Debian bullseye/sid

Re: Defun Self Documentation

[Michael Heerdegen]

Eric S Fraga <e.fraga@ucl.ac.uk> writes:

> Please stop.  Thank you.

Side perspective: Now he doesn't ignore his anger although we said he
should, and we also don't ignore it, although he said we should.

Michael.

Re: Defun Self Documentation

[Eli Zaretskii]

> Date: Mon, 09 Nov 2020 05:39:13 +0100
> From: Emanuel Berg via Users list for the GNU Emacs text editor <help-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>
> 
> >> Except not entirely, as you did say
> >>
> >>   (show-paren-mode t)
> >>
> >> which I changed into the more correct
> >>
> >>   (show-paren-mode 1)
> >
> > WAIT - or was it the other way around?
> 
> I'm sorry Eli, because this unclarity we cannot rule you out from
> the The Clueless Online Faculty. You stay on the list:
> 
>   https://dataswamp.org/~incal/CLUELESS-ONLINE
> 
> and, in the spirit of education, an Elisp version:
> 
>   (setq clueless-online-faculty '(eli-zaretskii))

When you refuse to learn from comments by others on your code, you are
only hurting yourself, in the short and in the long run.  Adding
ad-hominem attacks doesn't change that basic truth.

Hopefully, others have read those comments and will draw their own
conclusions.  It is for them that I wrote those comments in the first
place.