[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: State of the overlay tree branch?

From: Eli Zaretskii
Subject: Re: State of the overlay tree branch?
Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 08:50:46 +0200

> From: Stefan Monnier <address@hidden>
> Date: Sun, 18 Mar 2018 21:33:05 -0400
> >> If lsp-mode/lsp-ui needs a fast line counter, one can easily be
> >> provided by exposing find_newline to Lisp.  IME, it's lightning-fast,
> >> and should run circles around count-lines (used by line-number-at-pos).
> > Having a fast line counter in Elisp would be terrific.
> It should be pretty easy to provide such a thing by relying on a cache
> of the last call.

This is already coded, see display_count_lines.  That's what the
native line-number display uses.  Exposing it to Lisp should be easy.
But I don't believe it could be orders of magnitude faster than
count-lines, even though it doesn't need to convert character position
to byte position.

I'm guessing something entirely different and unrelated to
line-counting per se is at work here.

> Tho Sebastian's experience seems to indicate that the
> current code doesn't only suffer from the time to count LF but also from
> the time to process the markers.

Not sure what marker processing did you have in mind.  Can you

> I seem to remember someone else experiencing a similar problem and
> suggesting that the problem lies in the charpos_to_bytepos (and/or
> bytepos_to_charpos) conversion function, which iterates through all the
> markers to try and find a "nearby" marker (because markers keep track
> of both their bytepos and their charpos).  Looking for a nearby marker
> to avoid scanning the whole buffer is a good idea in many cases, but not
> if scanning the list of markers takes more time than scanning the
> whole buffer.

But find_newline doesn't look for markers, and it converts character
to byte position just 2 times.  Or am I missing something?

reply via email to

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