From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Gregory Heytings Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#57669: 29.0.50; C-n, C-p off under long lines Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2022 15:41:39 +0000 Message-ID: References: <87y1uujufi.fsf@dick> <83k06effg6.fsf@gnu.org> <87tu5ijcqg.fsf@dick> <2e25ca87e3d9ee13ba3e@heytings.org> <87illxka46.fsf@dick> <8335d1dr39.fsf@gnu.org> <87mtb8hezl.fsf@dick> <87edwkhb0r.fsf@dick> <874jxgh9is.fsf@dick> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset=us-ascii Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="22070"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: 57669@debbugs.gnu.org To: dick Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Fri Sep 09 17:42:24 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 1oWg99-0005Uv-8N for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 09 Sep 2022 17:42:23 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:47736 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oWg97-0007JP-O8 for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane-mx.org; Fri, 09 Sep 2022 11:42:21 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:43172) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oWg8p-00075E-2p for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Sep 2022 11:42:03 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.43]:46368) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oWg8o-0007X1-Kz for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Sep 2022 11:42:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oWg8o-00041U-Gb for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 09 Sep 2022 11:42:02 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Gregory Heytings Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 09 Sep 2022 15:42:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 57669 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs Original-Received: via spool by 57669-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B57669.166273810415441 (code B ref 57669); Fri, 09 Sep 2022 15:42:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 57669) by debbugs.gnu.org; 9 Sep 2022 15:41:44 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:35067 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oWg8W-00040z-2c for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 09 Sep 2022 11:41:44 -0400 Original-Received: from heytings.org ([95.142.160.155]:33888) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1oWg8T-00040q-Tc for 57669@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 09 Sep 2022 11:41:42 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=heytings.org; s=20220101; t=1662738099; bh=Jprv8gHZCDc3C+mFyEdB26tuB7ZtY9DtLyv5dPzUiJY=; h=Date:From:To:cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:Message-ID:References:From; b=3Y79mwhuGwO+ygOCIGHqV0sUK8cYuxz5Q9plbDBt/riNUfl4vnMyM3BKWs4Kprsqx ZY+7dhgNwyqINmmc8T0o8+CnzBzOA8g+eG2DhG/3q/z29FOPcCUEgCTbY3WCfK+qFG 32oIqQRI8ER0tC+G8W4tT/9fyOTWy9XLi6V2/XOYN1as9Uy4O2dw+W8uUdw3hMunZd 51eJqQRyV0+hQPUYIh+H/fvG7NiHF91AQePIu/Hq3gUEvKFYiA+tpWZr4cJe9Qht6s i4GfNhJXuRIOnU8Qkg7QBgWd6KbIrzAajV8kXOHxspVYB1QOYzBwHjzZ5yUuM7Di0x Dl1MOPgq+M/gg== In-Reply-To: <874jxgh9is.fsf@dick> 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:241991 Archived-At: >> And what's your conclusion now? > > The same? I'll repeat: > > And to be clear, you're going from "ineffable" performance to just > "underwhelming." As of cb036a7 you still need find-file-literally for > some semblance of respectability. > A rather strange conclusion. Open a 1 MB file with short lines (under 80 chars) and use your benchmark on such a file. You'll see that scrolling through the whole buffer, one line at a time, takes quite some time, too. Here it takes about 20 seconds, and your benchmark (with find-file and 10 lines that are each 100K characters) takes 120 seconds. That's much better than "just underwhelming", isn't it? Not to mention that such a benchmark is itself not representative of an actual use of an editor.