[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?
From: |
martin rudalics |
Subject: |
Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive? |
Date: |
Sat, 21 Mar 2015 13:30:46 +0100 |
> If the flag that forced redisplay to honor WS is still set, then (4)
> won't happen, I think. Instead, redisplay will recenter point in the
> window.
Recentering point during scrolling constitutes the worst of all worlds
in my experience.
> Good luck implementing that! We already have a thick forest of
> conflicting goals in that area,
We can always close our eyes and hope that moving further goals to
`pre-redisplay-function' won't thicken that forest even more so.
> due to requirements for scroll-margin,
> scroll-*-aggressively, scroll-conservatively, and scroll-step.
I've never been able to understand these anyway. Here, I only want to
keep point from recentering. One option for that would be all I need.
>> Note that (3) means we have to search all text/overlay properties of
>> every window that gets redisplayed for the sole purpose of detecting the
>> presence of intangible text. In my estimate 99.99% of our windows don't
>> contain such text.
>
> We already do precisely that, just in another place, where we move
> point.
In adjust_point_for_property?
> That was the issue that triggered this thread in the first
> place. Stefan's intent is to lower the number of such searches, by
> only doing that for position of point that will be actually shown to
> the user, whereas today we do that for interim positions that will
> never be displayed.
The display engine knows what will be displayed where. Elisp never
will. I see little reason to delegate to Elisp the task of finding a
position where to show the cursor.
martin
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, (continued)
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, Eli Zaretskii, 2015/03/23
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, Stefan Monnier, 2015/03/23
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, Stefan Monnier, 2015/03/23
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, Eli Zaretskii, 2015/03/23
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, Stefan Monnier, 2015/03/23
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, Eli Zaretskii, 2015/03/21
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, martin rudalics, 2015/03/21
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, Stefan Monnier, 2015/03/21
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, martin rudalics, 2015/03/21
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, Eli Zaretskii, 2015/03/21
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?,
martin rudalics <=
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, Eli Zaretskii, 2015/03/21
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, Stefan Monnier, 2015/03/20
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, martin rudalics, 2015/03/20
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, Richard Stallman, 2015/03/17
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, Yuri Khan, 2015/03/17
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, Eli Zaretskii, 2015/03/17
- Re: Can we make set_point_both less expensive?, Richard Stallman, 2015/03/18