From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: Ihor Radchenko <yantar92@gmail.com>
Subject: bug#35453: 26.1; Poor performance of vertical-motion in large org
 buffer
Date: Sat, 18 May 2019 18:36:37 +0800
Message-ID: <87mujk6ocq.fsf__15502.6848706015$1558175927$gmane$org@yantar92-laptop.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me>
References: <87pnpaob79.fsf@yantar92-laptop.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me>
	<83zhoatavq.fsf@gnu.org>
	<87k1f5ww0l.fsf@yantar92-laptop.i-did-not-set--mail-host-address--so-tickle-me>
	<834l68lwoz.fsf@gnu.org>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Return-path: <emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:51140)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1hRwj4-0002i5-Vn
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 18 May 2019 06:38:03 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <Debian-debbugs@debbugs.gnu.org>) id 1hRwj3-0006Ua-VV
	for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sat, 18 May 2019 06:38:02 -0400
Sender: "Debbugs-submit" <debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org>
Resent-Message-ID: <handler.35453.B35453.155817586324285@debbugs.gnu.org>
In-Reply-To: <834l68lwoz.fsf@gnu.org>
List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." <emacs-orgmode.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/options/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/emacs-orgmode/>
List-Post: <mailto:emacs-orgmode@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-orgmode>,
	<mailto:emacs-orgmode-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Sender: "Emacs-orgmode"
	<emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
Cc: 35453@debbugs.gnu.org

> There are no intervals in this story.  The way overlays are
> implemented, they don't use intervals (if by that you mean the
> facilities in intervals.c).  Someone was working on making overlays
> more efficient by changing the low-level implementation details, but
> that work is yet unfinished.

I see. Hope that overlays will be optimised eventually...

Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:

>> From: Ihor Radchenko <yantar92@gmail.com>
>> Cc: 35453@debbugs.gnu.org
>> Date: Sun, 05 May 2019 09:05:46 +0800
>> 
>>   > Of course, if someone comes up with ideas how to speed up
>>   > vertical-motion without changing what Org does with overlays and/or
>>   > how overlays are implemented, such ideas will be most welcome.
>> 
>>   Rather dumb idea.
>>   Currently, vertical-motion just loops over all the intervals in the
>>   buffer. What if we optimise next-single-char-property-change and use it
>>   in vertical-motion? Say, the interval data structure can extended. In
>>   addition to the currently available pointers to next and previous
>>   intervals, each (or just 'invisible') property of the interval might
>>   also contain a pointer to next/previous interval with different property
>>   value. Then, by increasing the structure size a bit, we can
>>   significantly speed up the buffer motion commands.
>
> There are no intervals in this story.  The way overlays are
> implemented, they don't use intervals (if by that you mean the
> facilities in intervals.c).  Someone was working on making overlays
> more efficient by changing the low-level implementation details, but
> that work is yet unfinished.