[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
bug#26710: Fwd: 25.2; project-find-regexp makes emacs use 100% cpu
From: |
Eli Zaretskii |
Subject: |
bug#26710: Fwd: 25.2; project-find-regexp makes emacs use 100% cpu |
Date: |
Tue, 02 May 2017 20:26:19 +0300 |
> Cc: hariharanrangasamy@gmail.com, 26710@debbugs.gnu.org
> From: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov@yandex.ru>
> Date: Tue, 2 May 2017 13:00:06 +0300
>
> On 02.05.2017 10:15, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
>
> > Can you explain the significance of xref--regexp-syntax-dependent-p's
> > tests? I don't know enough about xref to grasp that just by looking
> > at the changes.
>
> When it returns nil (the regexp is not affected by syntax-table):
>
> If the file containing the hit is not open, we now skip inserting the
> first few lines of that file into the temporary buffer, and calling
> set-auto-mode.
>
> And, whether it's open or not, we skip the syntax-propertize call.
OK, I will look at that function with this in mind.
> Still, if the filter function and sentinel functions take a lot of time
> (and/or get called a lot), like it will be in this example, the UI can't
> as responsive as usual, can it?
The sentinel/filter won't be called at all if keyboard/mouse input is
available. Once they are called, if each call takes a long processing
time, the UI could feel sluggish, yes. But I don't quite see how
using threads will avoid the same problem, since the mechanism for
thread switch is basically the same as for multiplexing UI with
subprocess output.
> I'd like a more general advice first. E.g. do we want to go this road?
IMO, we should first explore the async subprocess road.
> It seems a bit brittle, though: if the process filter is supposed to be
> calling the callback for each item, the callback has to be in place
> right away. And the process will be started before that happens.
You can countermand that by using make-process with the :stop
attribute, then use 'continue-process' when everything is set up.
> We'll probably be saved by filters having to wait until the current
> command finishes executing, though.
Not sure I follow you: a filter function is called whenever some
output arrives from the subprocess. So they don't need to wait for
the subprocess to finish.