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: Low redisplay performance (23 regression) Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 16:00:42 -0400 Message-ID: References: <4870CC42-A08E-4BE9-B566-0F4DA7AB0B74@gmail.com> <878wlj228q.fsf@freebits.de> <87skjrz7k7.fsf@freebits.de> <878wliy4q3.fsf@freebits.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1241121667 27326 80.91.229.12 (30 Apr 2009 20:01:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 30 Apr 2009 20:01:07 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Tobias C. Rittweiler" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Apr 30 22:00:58 2009 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 4.50) id 1LzcRB-0006J4-W5 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 30 Apr 2009 22:00:54 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55094 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LzcRB-0000qZ-Ik for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 30 Apr 2009 16:00:53 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LzcR8-0000qU-28 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Apr 2009 16:00:50 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1LzcR3-0000qI-Nh for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Apr 2009 16:00:49 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=44104 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1LzcR3-0000qF-GB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Apr 2009 16:00:45 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.pppoe.ca ([206.248.154.182]:22666 helo=ironport2-out.teksavvy.com) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1LzcR3-0006PK-3t for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 30 Apr 2009 16:00:45 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AlkGAB6g+UnO+ITX/2dsb2JhbACBUM9Fg38FhTo X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.40,274,1238990400"; d="scan'208";a="37835890" Original-Received: from 206-248-132-215.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([206.248.132.215]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP; 30 Apr 2009 16:00:43 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id E7D947F64; Thu, 30 Apr 2009 16:00:42 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <878wliy4q3.fsf@freebits.de> (Tobias C. Rittweiler's message of "Thu, 30 Apr 2009 09:34:44 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.92 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.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:110578 Archived-At: > The second case seems to slow down everything a little bit. Although I > wouldn't vouch for the results as they're only based on 1 sample. But > has there been work on the byte-compiler? Yes, the byte-compiler has been changed slightly (some broken optimizations have been fixed, mostly), so that can explain the little difference. But still Emacs-23 with Emacs-22's font-lock.elc still takes 3.9s for font-lock-fontify-keywords-region compared to 2.2s under Emacs-22. So some of the underlying primitives have slowed down significantly. Could you show the value of font-lock-keywords in that buffer? Stefan