From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: jit-lock-antiblink-grace Date: Sat, 12 Oct 2019 10:13:42 -0400 Message-ID: References: <834l0enw8c.fsf@gnu.org> <83y2xqm6m4.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: blaine.gmane.org; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:195.159.176.226"; logging-data="152013"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@blaine.gmane.org" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: =?windows-1252?B?Sm/jbyBU4XZvcmE=?= , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 12 16:14:30 2019 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.89) (envelope-from ) id 1iJIA9-000dRN-Iq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 12 Oct 2019 16:14:30 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33468 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iJIA8-00037k-9N for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 12 Oct 2019 10:14:28 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:38691) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1iJI9a-00037J-1R for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Oct 2019 10:13:55 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iJI9X-0002fN-Qa for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 12 Oct 2019 10:13:53 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:11599) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1iJI9U-0002cS-2V; Sat, 12 Oct 2019 10:13:48 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 0B59581119; Sat, 12 Oct 2019 10:13:46 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg2.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 4721A80EB9; Sat, 12 Oct 2019 10:13:44 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1570889624; bh=ek77H3nfPvkySoNHmoRV6dCNP1/thjLHhJ5L8+uhFNU=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:References:Date:In-Reply-To:From; b=Lunf9EeSuSVLX6CIGXh3k2r3PAhllE1UoRY4H04q8UwI4DLZbLaHIBtC8GWg0jCE6 7KkIpJVCtT8F/34xTZvhF8bvMX+6d2kVM7TUnPS9veRbGXNl1k9JJx3xtKJaR3zrxA ZtWj1DmNbnGTSDgFlXczToOo3xRHluhLWo1lq8p4xJtHv4Aj1JXkTZSAzIpXWgJ8wE IsQRqBXC9guvQIAqnwm4Gez/5yU2/sHW6GX/eqOWtG4Lo21C8EOMF+D1ipYuL8EWpk EKeRXiHqIPLg4GkbIWdLyJjS+brvWzoB9BWgD9xTqgyMundMZ2iwwH8BQdly8y6jCS 9VzxvOb7IDgxA== Original-Received: from pastel (unknown [216.154.35.246]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id D5F67120BB5; Sat, 12 Oct 2019 10:13:43 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <83y2xqm6m4.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 12 Oct 2019 16:32:51 +0300") X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Received-From: 132.204.25.50 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:240916 Archived-At: >> My very first version relied on an extension of the existing >> jit-lock-context-time, but I seem to remember it broke down here and >> there sometimes. I agreed with Stefan (possibly off-list) to use a >> post-command-hook, which is safer. But I can have a look at the [ FWIW: I can't remember why I recommended/suggested post-command-hook, sorry. ] >> original version and re-study those problems more closely. > We also have display-related hooks. If you could use one of them, > that might be better, because one could generally type quite a few > commands before redisplay kicks in, and post-command-hook runs once > for every command. Really? AFAIK we redisplay at the end of every command executed. We additionally redisplay after processing filters and after receiving an event that turned out to be a prefix key, etc... So, AFAICT we generally redisplay at least as often as we run post-command-hook. The only case where we don't is when we can't keep up with the input events in which case we skip redisplay, but that's the case where we're *already* too slow. > It's a backward-incompatible behavior, and is not being developed due > to bug reports, It was developed because people like Alan are so bothered by the flashing that they're going through lengths to find other ways to avoid it. > so why make it the default right from the start? It also slows down > cursor motion (which should probably be in the doc string as well). It shouldn't slow down cursor motion, normally (at least not in any measurable way). Also I expect the implementation will change over time, as experience is gained with it. > I still don't think I understand what would constitute an > "unterminated string at EOL", then. Could you show two examples, one > where there is such a string, the other where there isn't? Code like: var x = "foo y = "bar"; where the user is in the middle of writing `x = "foobar";` but hasn't yet closed the string. Stefan