[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Mysterious fontification/C++ context issue

From: David Kastrup
Subject: Re: Mysterious fontification/C++ context issue
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2006 16:13:29 +0100
User-agent: Gnus/5.11 (Gnus v5.11) Emacs/22.0.91 (gnu/linux)

Alan Mackenzie <address@hidden> writes:

> Guten Tag, David!
> On Sun, Dec 10, 2006 at 01:46:40PM +0100, David Kastrup wrote:
>> Alan Mackenzie <address@hidden> writes:
>> > With Martin Rudalics's optimisation to c-beginning-of-defun-raw, I
>> > don't feel that the slowness is too bad any more (though he does
>> > ;-).  In the extreme case xdisp.c, scrolling to EOB and M-v is
>> > mildly sluggish (about half a second), on my 5 year old Athlon 1.2
>> > GHz machine.  A typical new PC now is, say, 3 GHZ.  In the time
>> > Emacs 22 is the current release, a typical new PC will come to be
>> > around 20 GHz, and this slowness will not matter.
>> Please, arguments like that are just not acceptable.  If examples with
>> barely tolerable behavior can be come across easily, you can bet that
>> there will be normal use cases where the the behavior will be quite
>> intolerable.  And even on faster machines, editing should try avoiding
>> draining unnecessary CPU power: editing is by far the most important
>> application where you want to have a long battery life for laptops.
>> I am working with a 600MHz laptop, and my occasionally used desktop
>> system has a 233MHz processor.  The preview-latex
>> <URL:http://www.gnu.org/software/auctex/preview-latex.html> package
>> has been streamlined to operate well on such machines.  It would be
>> really a bad hoax if syntax highlighting (which does a lot less) would
>> make such machines unusable for editing with an up-to-date Emacs with
>> default settings.
> Hey, just calm down a bit and take a few long deep breaths!  You've
> snipped my argument and left only the supporting discussion.  I'm NOT
> arguing that anybody should have this "barely tolerable behaviour"
> thrust upon him; the user should be able to set his system up as he
> wishes.

Disagree.  The _default_ should be such that the behavior is
tolerable, without the user having to set up anything.

> I'm merely saying that in a few years time the point will be moot.

Disagree.  Non-local O(n^2) (or worse) behavior will exhaust any
advance of computing power eventually.  You've snipped my argument.

> And that for Emacs 23, we will be able to set the default value of
> open-paren-...-start to nil, just as in Emacs 22 font-locking is
> enabled by default.

We only enabled font-locking after hunting down the cases where it
lead to intolerable behavior.  Since the original behavior was not
deemed acceptable, I don't see why we should now act cavalier about

> Hopefully Emacs will always be such that wierdos who, for whatever
> reason, want to run with font-lock disabled, or on bare TTYs, or on
> early 1990s machines can do so comfortably.  ;-)

Hopefully Emacs will work tolerably for all use cases without having
to strip it down to "weirdo level" from its default settings.

David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]