From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Font-lock in COMINT modes Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 15:38:34 -0500 Message-ID: References: <87vekaf780.fsf@stupidchicken.com> <87wt4pduvg.fsf@stupidchicken.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: main.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1166474386 22121 80.91.229.2 (18 Dec 2006 20:39:46 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 18 Dec 2006 20:39:46 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Dec 18 21:39:41 2006 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by ciao.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GwPGV-00007D-KD for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 18 Dec 2006 21:39:15 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GwPGV-000518-65 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 18 Dec 2006 15:39:15 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GwPFx-0004oX-DR for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Dec 2006 15:38:41 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1GwPFw-0004o1-Eq for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Dec 2006 15:38:40 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1GwPFv-0004ng-Ua for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Dec 2006 15:38:40 -0500 Original-Received: from [83.228.170.126] (helo=alfajor.home) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.52) id 1GwPFu-000120-UV; Mon, 18 Dec 2006 15:38:39 -0500 Original-Received: by alfajor.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 9F81C1C015; Mon, 18 Dec 2006 15:38:34 -0500 (EST) Original-To: Chong Yidong In-Reply-To: <87wt4pduvg.fsf@stupidchicken.com> (Chong Yidong's message of "Mon\, 18 Dec 2006 11\:36\:03 -0500") User-Agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.91 (gnu/linux) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:63940 Archived-At: >> I listed in FOR-RELEASE that this case is slow: >> >> You must have gotten that impression from Stefan's 12/08 message: >> >> if [font-lock-defaults ] is nil font-lock-mode-internal is not >> activated at all. AFAIK nil and (nil t) are equivalent (i.e. don't >> highlight anything), except that (nil t) takes a lot more CPU to do >> nothing (it runs all the font-lock-foo-function hooks, enables >> jit-lock so as to do nothing just-in-time rather than eagerly, >> checks where nothing needs to be done, rounds up to a whole number >> of lines the region upon which inaction is requested, checks if >> there's a multiline entity and extends the region even more, so that >> nothing is done in a multiline way, ...). >> >> Even though it is true that font lock jumps through more hoops with >> (nil t), there is no evidence that this slowdown affects the user. >> >> >> Could you check and see? > I haven't been able to observe any slowdown when font-lock-defaults is > (nil t). Not surprising, since I don't notice any slowdown when > font-lock-defaults is (something t), i.e. normal font-lock situations! > Maybe someone running on a 486 can observe a difference, who knows. Indeed, the "slowdown" should be completely and absolutely neligible, even on a 16MHz 386sx. Stefan