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: Performance Date: Sun, 06 Jun 2010 21:05:54 -0400 Message-ID: NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1275872770 23886 80.91.229.12 (7 Jun 2010 01:06:10 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2010 01:06:10 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Jun 07 03:06:09 2010 connect(): No such file or directory Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OLQn2-0002dZ-Jm for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Jun 2010 03:06:09 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:45241 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OLQn1-0003vy-VR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 06 Jun 2010 21:06:08 -0400 Original-Received: from [140.186.70.92] (port=48811 helo=eggs.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1OLQmr-0003tR-At for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Jun 2010 21:06:02 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OLQmp-0003gq-SE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Jun 2010 21:05:57 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.181]:60085 helo=ironport2-out.pppoe.ca) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1OLQmp-0003gm-PU for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 06 Jun 2010 21:05:55 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AskFABPjC0xFpYBi/2dsb2JhbACSKYwWcr1LhRcEjGc X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.53,374,1272859200"; d="scan'208";a="67463172" Original-Received: from 69-165-128-98.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([69.165.128.98]) by ironport2-out.pppoe.ca with ESMTP; 06 Jun 2010 21:05:54 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 38DDC81B0; Sun, 6 Jun 2010 21:05:54 -0400 (EDT) User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. 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:125565 Archived-At: It seems that functionality-wise, the bidi code is almost as good as it was before bidi. But performancewise, I experience some problems. I recently started to compile without -DENABLE_CHECKING and other such debugging code (tho still with -O0 and -g) and am seeing cases where cursor motion is slow. The problem is most notable in operations such as C-e or C-n/C-p (tho those tend to be fast enough as long as I'm in column 0). Redisplay itself also seems to be noticeable slower at times. This usually shows up after I open a few different buffers&frames (like when I have 10 frames or more (each one showing a single file), where most frames are sized 80x89). With -DENABLE_CHECKING, -DXASSERTS, and -DFONTSET_DEBUG, the slowdown is *very* noticeable, to the point of making Emacs sometimes painful to use. My machines range from Atom netbooks to core i7, so not "too old to be relevant". Stefan