From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#54608: 29.0.50; xref-search-program-alist: support ugrep Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2022 18:02:42 +0300 Message-ID: References: <7327a2ae-1a92-d1bc-f8ee-a95088ab5e52@inventati.org> <34f7b1f2-5987-bcb0-c329-7cdaf4d15095@yandex.ru> <7134959c-0a86-c997-bab4-376bdfa901c9@inventati.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="6993"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:91.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.5.0 To: Manuel Uberti , 54608@debbugs.gnu.org Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Mar 28 17:06:56 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1nYqxM-0001ao-Lz for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 28 Mar 2022 17:06:56 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57376 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nYqxL-00052H-5f for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 28 Mar 2022 11:06:55 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:54646) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nYqta-0001QD-JP for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Mar 2022 11:03:02 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:36833) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1nYqta-0006DS-8X for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Mar 2022 11:03:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1nYqta-0004FO-5u for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 28 Mar 2022 11:03:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Dmitry Gutov Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2022 15:03:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 54608 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 54608-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B54608.164847977316305 (code B ref 54608); Mon, 28 Mar 2022 15:03:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 54608) by debbugs.gnu.org; 28 Mar 2022 15:02:53 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:58962 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1nYqtR-0004Ev-Fg for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 28 Mar 2022 11:02:53 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-wm1-f51.google.com ([209.85.128.51]:55288) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1nYqtP-0004Eh-Fg for 54608@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 28 Mar 2022 11:02:52 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-wm1-f51.google.com with SMTP id r64so8572188wmr.4 for <54608@debbugs.gnu.org>; Mon, 28 Mar 2022 08:02:51 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20210112; h=sender:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent:subject :content-language:to:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=RbkIx9y1xjj4SeQ8FaOXXd8JGR0cJLd4cTOyLKxOHa4=; b=o0tSPMUQKQjnJOH5DnBYgadigNbG+W7iBBx0SGKme8va3b1TR09kp1tojk3oITG8Ud jCRIDiAN9MLxjeYDi/XHsG3cjxpF9DRSwdl0Zjdb/Htm2iXFIwJQPJ/Lqz2D615PhUqN tWw2M8FJL4JW8MbwvGvLklvAv+lKJtp9ulxJc3g/NCLCZVR7HPORH75rFJtYrtW0Ddsu 6DlC/SUJyy8mA+GpZWEeoFGid7+985ngRCvgvrMc8Wzjb4eN731L+iPZUqfhRnCAG333 E/PsVoHf1X6XFPgRF6IWZG8zrHL9jzwrBNumaCqEwxzP8pqXDR+wRJ+M6oK5vytcgccv v9ZQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20210112; h=x-gm-message-state:sender:message-id:date:mime-version:user-agent :subject:content-language:to:references:from:in-reply-to :content-transfer-encoding; bh=RbkIx9y1xjj4SeQ8FaOXXd8JGR0cJLd4cTOyLKxOHa4=; b=Yj9DIs33SQzioObbLEO6LmzCGp5nXrr+7sRtBSjEbr+U06GJg/QoQMiFLc8W7wGMdI Yv9XaGcTzSgvflG4gcOCULuDbK4zPEfJhk4Uc1hcaR39IETz5vduJ/VtrxCIz67X6f+n tdTkDA+QNrd/ShyC0ZHqXeXipAJfIT3lQyUtBTDsLoRKY0sYKA8GhnGwiwSjBKcnvOaY BvmxWu2I5ujQiwnF3VWbsd7vddUvHvN2Qbbovg+gDhbiZbIKTb19A0xB0C954CKo82w8 n6DgPtOtxGCiufyBP10kepQ+76R7UclSh+z6Pg56Owum07SNCbY+oK1S0MF9zVXob1OT TM3g== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM530aWBLDD1zR9f3xrAAIO1oQ0tsOaixgc/JuS+/PIrScDJztH9GY HfrwV7FmPttXQFenaeNJYKCpBPZiQNk= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwovCyToVW2VCQlUYHWD0x6YfCt6Buaw1U9D18s8CKskaH/F40kMtE7T4sVMsqiZAG+qoWsKQ== X-Received: by 2002:a7b:c2aa:0:b0:389:891f:1fd1 with SMTP id c10-20020a7bc2aa000000b00389891f1fd1mr36257034wmk.138.1648479765730; Mon, 28 Mar 2022 08:02:45 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from [192.168.0.6] ([46.251.119.176]) by smtp.googlemail.com with ESMTPSA id u7-20020a05600c19c700b0038cc9aac1a3sm13636002wmq.23.2022.03.28.08.02.44 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 bits=128/128); Mon, 28 Mar 2022 08:02:45 -0700 (PDT) Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <7134959c-0a86-c997-bab4-376bdfa901c9@inventati.org> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "bug-gnu-emacs" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.bugs:229018 Archived-At: On 28.03.2022 17:37, Manuel Uberti wrote: > On 28/03/22 14:57, Dmitry Gutov wrote: >> Does ugrep show better performance in this use case than grep on your >> machine? > > With ugrep running `M-: (benchmark 100 (project-find-regexp > "setq-default"))` in the directory containg Emacs source code returns: > > Elapsed time: 0.003903s > > With regular grep I get: > > Elapsed time: 0.026032s (0.022015s in 1 GCs) 0.026032s (0.022015s in 1 GCs) implies the total runtime sans GC takes 0.026 - 0.022 = 0.004, which is pretty much the same as what you measured for ugrep (0.0039). The the choice of search program is unlikely to affect the GC time. It probably occurred randomly. You might want to try doing a search in a larger project, for a relatively unique string (which has less than 100 matches, say). Then you can see the effect of search program's performance.