[Top][All Lists]
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Release plans
From: |
Stephen J. Turnbull |
Subject: |
Re: Release plans |
Date: |
Tue, 02 Sep 2008 12:26:02 +0900 |
Thomas Lord writes:
> of markers, but because this will be a self-adjusting tree
> all those operations will be O(1) in the expected case where
> changes display pretty good locality.
I would advise you not to expect that case. Experience in XEmacs
shows that some applications (the VM MUA in particular, but also the
old implementation of font-lock, dunno about jit-lock) like to run up
and down the buffer a lot. AFAICS it's really important to have O(log
N) worst-case behavior.
Sorry I can't be much more precise about why this happens, I just know
that our algorithms that deal with extents (which we use to support
overlay-like behavior and text properties) are tuned for good locality
and lose badly in large buffers; they show up as time hogs in profiling.
It's possible it's something internal to the implementation of
extents, too, but I think a word to the wise is appropriate here.
- Re: Release plans, (continued)
Re: Release plans, Stefan Monnier, 2008/09/01
Re: Release plans,
Stephen J. Turnbull <=
Re: Release plans, Thomas Lord, 2008/09/02
Re: Release plans, Stephen J. Turnbull, 2008/09/03