On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 10:11 PM, Frank Fischer <[email protected]> wrote: > Am Tue, 31 Jul 2012 17:40:49 +0200 > schrieb Nikolai Weibull <[email protected]>:
>> I just hold down ‘w’ and let it auto-repeat. Did you try that? > > Yes, that's what I tried but apparently on a too powerful machine ... Ah, so it was a question of computing power, after all. >> I ran with emacs -Q and load evil manually, with the same result >> (Fundamental mode). It’s not an old machine either (but I don’t think >> that’s relevant, as this command shouldn’t be slow on any sort of >> machine). > > Certainly you're right, it should be fast. I've just tried it again on > my old notebook and there holding 'w' pressed shows a big slowdown (the > cursor does not move at all until the button is released). > The problem is that evil does a lot of cleanup work after each single > command (usually in post-command-hooks, for example the repeat-system > and cursor adjustment at the eol and eob). And this is partially > relatively expensive (compared to a single forward-word) and probably > be improved (IIRC there's a function `evil-adjust-cursor' that > sometimes does some heavy stuff and it is called in forward word > motions but not in the backward direction). I’m on a 2 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo. This work your talking about must somehow be shuffling around a lot of memory or something similarly expensive. Is the gap being moved? I mean, what can be so expensive? Is it the use of saved restrictions/excursions? It makes me sad when a text editor is slow in the year 2012 (on late year 2008 hardware). (I’m not blaming you, it’s just sad that this can even occur.) I guess the upshot is that it gives me added incentive to try to stop just holding down movement keys and instead use isearch or pressing “10w”. _______________________________________________ implementations-list mailing list [email protected] https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/implementations-list
