> It looks like we could speed it up even more > by producing this list > > ! (setq whitespace-retval (cons (match-beginning 0) whitespace-retval)) > > only if it is actually wanted. Calling from whitespace-buffer > could pass t as an optional argument saying do produce this list.
We could at least shorten such lists to a reasonably length. > The overhead for maintaining > these overlays may grow non-linearly with respect to their number. Your > > > 3. unzip and then visit the attached slowtst.el (I drag&dropped it) > > has some 3500 lines which will produce approximately 7000 overlays. > > Is that still true after the changes you sent? Yes. But the file is pathological. > In addition, `whitespace-buffer' may unconditionally trigger a non-idle > timer which may trigger further executions of `whitespace-buffer'. The > doc-string of the timer says: > > "Timer object used to rescan the files in buffers that have been modified." > > That's false, whitespace doesn't check whether a file is modified. > > Can you fix that up too? I think (1) the timer should become an idle-timer, (2) quitting must be permitted, and (3) one could use `buffer-chars-modified-tick' - to check whether the latter works;-). On the other hand, most of this could be done via font-lock which would ask for a completely different design. _______________________________________________ emacs-pretest-bug mailing list emacs-pretest-bug@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-pretest-bug
