From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: New optimisations for long raw strings in C++ Mode. Date: Wed, 10 Aug 2022 18:31:00 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87fsi5xw9l.fsf@gnus.org> <83wnbhtlzb.fsf@gnu.org> <703c2351d96919276449@heytings.org> <83o7wsqlcm.fsf@gnu.org> <83edxoqcnl.fsf@gnu.org> <83a68cqbm0.fsf@gnu.org> <834jykq9m6.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="18055"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: Alan Mackenzie , gregory@heytings.org, larsi@gnus.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Aug 11 00:32:46 2022 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@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 1oLuFq-0004T5-6R for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 11 Aug 2022 00:32:46 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:57372 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oLuFo-0003QR-IK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 18:32:44 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:56202) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oLuEJ-0002jC-JT for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 18:31:12 -0400 Original-Received: from mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca ([132.204.25.50]:59281) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1oLuEG-0008KI-NR; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 18:31:10 -0400 Original-Received: from pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 407DC44254C; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 18:31:06 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (unknown [172.31.2.1]) by pmg3.iro.umontreal.ca (Proxmox) with ESMTP id 9EC9B442549; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 18:31:04 -0400 (EDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=iro.umontreal.ca; s=mail; t=1660170664; bh=7S5672nvW8OtQydJBtL0fz8fGo14awQ5GLmSSnLQcyw=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:In-Reply-To:References:Date:From; b=MxqnWSU4UE3/UIbl3VGaz5uKgoFTQtSo1b/qoDBnPJ/GDvzP/+x9FPFCGV/YG8mr6 tdEIlzm/qPhOrXhGZzn+S6k8ihRYoP/glbMokr8Kgx2jf66YcD897Q2/+lYnoFmie0 ELQanJhXMQ5iLiN2DG3K1NrJFTLDB4uOOoii/eSiPWoC9TUHC+dS5GWoDD/aeZoryd cRsjPmbHWINLGk4dIrFTnTfewkXujmcWrrW72GIo3hV5UdULogbQnB62re2AOB1Yk3 dAdJPcqlWryiGC9QF1a0BydHXABjUAhepSTT+SEPEYu5PNOUdogOaTvKLzFXB5LFIO uDdfDMXYIAvvw== Original-Received: from milanesa (dyn.144-85-183-175.dsl.vtx.ch [144.85.183.175]) by mail01.iro.umontreal.ca (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 6E8101204B7; Wed, 10 Aug 2022 18:31:03 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <834jykq9m6.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Wed, 10 Aug 2022 20:41:37 +0300") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=132.204.25.50; envelope-from=monnier@iro.umontreal.ca; helo=mailscanner.iro.umontreal.ca X-Spam_score_int: -42 X-Spam_score: -4.3 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: "Emacs-devel" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:293367 Archived-At: > Really? Then please tell me how is it that we the humans can detect > incorrect fontifications even when shown partial strings and comments? That's usually because we can tell the difference between valid C code and human text and then based on that we can heuristically guess whats comment/strings/code. Our guesses can be wrong, tho. And making such a guess without some AI-style thingy is somewhat difficult. `syntax-begin-function` could use such a thing, but we made it obsolete because making it work well tends to be costly. But that was used for "really nearby" (i.e. find a safe spot near enough that we can avoid scanning 10kB of code, meaning that the heuristic shouldn't take more time than scanning 10kB of code). Maybe to speed up `syntax-ppss` in large buffers, we could re-introduce something like `syntax-begin-function` but where the idea is to try and find a safe spot heuristically within the preceding 1MB or so to avoid scanning the preceding GBs of code: this would give us a higher time-budget for the heuristic, making it possible to work well enough (and it would be used only in buffers >1MB). Stefan