[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Problems with syntax-ppss
From: |
Alan Mackenzie |
Subject: |
Re: Problems with syntax-ppss |
Date: |
Sat, 5 Apr 2008 14:46:42 +0000 |
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.9i |
Hi, S and M!
On Fri, Apr 04, 2008 at 11:14:55PM +0200, martin rudalics wrote:
> >I strongly recommend to always call syntax-ppss in a widened buffer.
>
> ... and with match-data saved.
Er, your replies don't exactly radiate an aura of confidence about
syntax-ppss. ;-(
I think you (Stefan) 're saying that the function isn't 100% defined for
a narrowed buffer. Will calling s-ppss on a narrowed buffer corrupt the
cache at all, for example?
As a matter of interest, are there any benchmark figures for s-ppss?
Like, how many characters do you have to scan more than, before s-ppss
(an interpreted lisp function) starts being faster than
(parse-partial-sexp 1 (point)) (a fast function written in C)?
--
Alan.
- Problems with syntax-ppss, Alan Mackenzie, 2008/04/04
- Re: Problems with syntax-ppss, Lennart Borgman (gmail), 2008/04/04
- Re: Problems with syntax-ppss, Stefan Monnier, 2008/04/04
- Re: Problems with syntax-ppss, martin rudalics, 2008/04/04
- Re: Problems with syntax-ppss,
Alan Mackenzie <=
- Re: Problems with syntax-ppss, Stefan Monnier, 2008/04/05
- Re: Problems with syntax-ppss, Alan Mackenzie, 2008/04/06
- Re: Problems with syntax-ppss, Stefan Monnier, 2008/04/07
- Re: Problems with syntax-ppss, Lennart Borgman (gmail), 2008/04/07
- Re: Problems with syntax-ppss, Stefan Monnier, 2008/04/07
- Re: Problems with syntax-ppss, Stefan Monnier, 2008/04/07