Richard wrote: > > That is why I suggested recording these ppss values in text > > properties of the first character on a line--so that they would stay > > around for comparison later. > > That would be fine. But recording these properties for each and every > line fontified would introduce too much overhead. > > I suspect think it is comparable to the amount of space used by > font-lock mode now. Maybe less. If so, why is it too much? >
I somewhat fell between two stools here. With respect to my first proposal Stefan judged ".. yet-another-text-property is a waste of precious CPU and memory resources." > > Another possible advantage is: if things are not in sync for the first > > line after the end of the changed text, it might be in sync on a > > subsequent line, and that could avoid refontifying most of the lines > > on the screen. > > > > I can think of two interpretations for "things are not in sync": > > It means "the before and after ppss values do not match". > > You're arguing this can't happen very easily. Maybe that is true. > I didn't argue that. Complete ppss are hardly ever "in sync" after a modification of preceding text. The values of ppss I need to determine whether context changed might be in sync quite often. Stefan wrote: > I suggested to compare (not (equal (nth 0 ppss) (nth > 0 jit-lock-context-ppss))) for "completeness". > That's reasonable. I'll do that. _______________________________________________ Emacs-devel mailing list Emacs-devel@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/emacs-devel
