From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms11 with LMTPS id OIOOBn4m5V+uKgAA0tVLHw (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 23:38:38 +0000 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:4a6f::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id ObBdAn4m5V8qPQAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 23:38:38 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 66AF19403C9 for ; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 23:38:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: from localhost ([::1]:47352 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ksaBo-0008A8-0m for larch@yhetil.org; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 18:38:36 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:41918) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ksaBA-0008A1-1c for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 18:37:56 -0500 Received: from mail-wm1-x32c.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::32c]:53481) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ksaB8-00009J-Gy for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 18:37:55 -0500 Received: by mail-wm1-x32c.google.com with SMTP id k10so2563659wmi.3 for ; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 15:37:49 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=dT5EEv5Z6SgV2VWk9YsBT+o+5d2Cd9xR05UR6zdqBD4=; b=d48FmsIafATQRWB+1qGblPmFwy8uwmmkcYWzWIhNlQYpziuyFv3wZZ3qEgEmMvg6/t CD1HBEqUa3f4+6CtPN1riiuLFLCmmKYFRnl4QkdAEQGacA4dA2GhHo48l6BF+vykeOaw MvjscbZqUr8KhbO5yW8qlxORte4cuHZyA0siElSfW2KvpCRohglpjDRA2qBpIvFLxrjr lbYMBrslsxnxIW0Z3MU2axt/ceCRuFCtEBhc2VWpI0t77YGljzjkR3XsRcusIxONQK4y X1Rgq3fl/2wInob0RakeByy5W/uaEaQubna4+6FyCx4pLqcSbQ2ksfCrRE3lFVus1TD/ tqLQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to :message-id:user-agent:mime-version:content-transfer-encoding; bh=dT5EEv5Z6SgV2VWk9YsBT+o+5d2Cd9xR05UR6zdqBD4=; b=SbFtbHiMWn8m1jpN3hGy4fpwTz+4D+FkrKuoO67sJlr3a3mmoHVyJtW4I2BZloYlAP La8nBui6FHqSDHKf9zT6ilLyobdzybOxi96wWuxCnxG6j71rS0JEW18BfvIvG5hqu/4s agE9ZPz8XfwZCleqoduzDD9t5SAGI9mNFi8x/LL4IN9mcelSkk/xo+/cMNoD/YjVwDU2 1RJmrUwExCg2OXH1YPpaujOV62DaVM1kclDNqCxkDPucEh0s9L0Qebm+KEMAMMP2NOho kQORnlgLapyx4K6P1L7hhNoPypttv04zWo+myYeDuP8yNFrXx/Sqz+uJ60Ff1dGmzSPg hMcg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532cF/KhdveIhvozvlAkNkcEUEKH8+sPCwC8D67Iw1IBlLt9lelD wNUeQogoh7jd/aO8brrRkQj/1lexZnI= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJwAD2f0qiN59pnxyoi++sNBLfX/Isan7jMciYrHoRrXxIW6uqIqDXFI+WX6J2ARKlakVpRiZA== X-Received: by 2002:a1c:9d16:: with SMTP id g22mr6057785wme.140.1608853068288; Thu, 24 Dec 2020 15:37:48 -0800 (PST) Received: from hirondell (alyon-654-1-449-182.w109-213.abo.wanadoo.fr. [109.213.105.182]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id n189sm5438266wmf.20.2020.12.24.15.37.46 (version=TLS1_3 cipher=TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 bits=256/256); Thu, 24 Dec 2020 15:37:47 -0800 (PST) From: =?utf-8?Q?K=C3=A9vin_Le_Gouguec?= To: Ihor Radchenko Subject: Re: [9.4] Fixing logbook visibility during isearch References: <87h7x9e5jo.fsf@localhost> <87ftb9pqop.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <875zc2du63.fsf@localhost> <87wo4en8qk.fsf@nicolasgoaziou.fr> <87mu31adeu.fsf@localhost> <871rkcbx40.fsf@kyleam.com> <87mu301in8.fsf@localhost> <87lfh5vvrp.fsf@localhost> <87sgbc4qpl.fsf@gmail.com> <87sgbaw58y.fsf@localhost> <87pn6ew2pv.fsf@localhost> <8736393tlw.fsf@gmail.com> <87eemtm1ic.fsf@localhost> <875z83hwuc.fsf@gmail.com> <874knm61p3.fsf@localhost> <87r1nrdl5o.fsf_-_@gmail.com> <87r1nqjv9w.fsf@localhost> <87czz91v9h.fsf@gmail.com> <87v9d15dd5.fsf@localhost> <87blesa3mg.fsf@gmail.com> <875z4zam2s.fsf@localhost> Date: Fri, 25 Dec 2020 00:37:45 +0100 In-Reply-To: <875z4zam2s.fsf@localhost> (Ihor Radchenko's message of "Fri, 18 Dec 2020 10:23:55 +0800") Message-ID: <8735zu7p2u.fsf@gmail.com> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2a00:1450:4864:20::32c; envelope-from=kevin.legouguec@gmail.com; helo=mail-wm1-x32c.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -3.02 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=gmail.com header.s=20161025 header.b=d48FmsIa; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=gmail.com; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 66AF19403C9 X-Spam-Score: -3.02 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: zdmo1Dh5mwPX Ihor Radchenko writes: > K=C3=A9vin Le Gouguec writes: > >> Since the changes in Org 9.4 aimed at improving performance, is there a >> test case somewhere in the "Mitigating the poor Emacs performance on >> huge org files" thread that could help ensure that a tentative fix will >> not degrade performance? > > The first message in the thread ;) I believe it was also used to > benchmark the change in 9.4. Thanks for the pointer! I've looked at your branch for inspiration, and my takeaway is that the isearch-open-invisible-temporary route might be too involved for a bugfix, especially if it's going to be reverted wholesale when your branch gets merged. Then again, maybe I'm not smart enough to devise a solution. I wonder if the path of least resistance couldn't be found in org-cycle-hide-drawers: right now this function just skips over drawers which are covered with an invisible overlay, but maybe it should not skip a drawer if the overlay starts before it (i.e. the overlay is not specific to this drawer but covers a whole containing section).