On Sun, 20 Nov 2011 20:07:02 -0500, Austin Clements wrote:
> This is just cleanup. These markers are all immediately resolved to
> points by Emacs, so using markers here is just unncessary overhead.
Pushed.
d
On Sun, 20 Nov 2011 20:07:02 -0500, Austin Clements wrote:
> This is just cleanup. These markers are all immediately resolved to
> points by Emacs, so using markers here is just unncessary overhead.
Pushed.
d
___
notmuch mailing list
notmuch@notmuchma
On Sun, 20 Nov 2011 20:07:02 -0500, Austin Clements wrote:
> This is just cleanup. These markers are all immediately resolved to
> points by Emacs, so using markers here is just unncessary overhead.
> ---
> I originally did this for performance, since Emacs has to scan all
> un-GC'd markers on ev
This is just cleanup. These markers are all immediately resolved to
points by Emacs, so using markers here is just unncessary overhead.
---
I originally did this for performance, since Emacs has to scan all
un-GC'd markers on every buffer change, but it turns out to matter
notmuch.
emacs/notmuch
On Sun, 20 Nov 2011 20:07:02 -0500, Austin Clements wrote:
> This is just cleanup. These markers are all immediately resolved to
> points by Emacs, so using markers here is just unncessary overhead.
> ---
> I originally did this for performance, since Emacs has to scan all
> un-GC'd markers on ev
This is just cleanup. These markers are all immediately resolved to
points by Emacs, so using markers here is just unncessary overhead.
---
I originally did this for performance, since Emacs has to scan all
un-GC'd markers on every buffer change, but it turns out to matter
notmuch.
emacs/notmuch
