From unknown Thu Aug 14 21:52:54 2025 Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: MIME-tools 5.509 (Entity 5.509) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 From: bug#14966 <14966@debbugs.gnu.org> To: bug#14966 <14966@debbugs.gnu.org> Subject: Status: 24.3.50; Char-displayable-p is a very long running function Reply-To: bug#14966 <14966@debbugs.gnu.org> Date: Fri, 15 Aug 2025 04:52:54 +0000 retitle 14966 24.3.50; Char-displayable-p is a very long running function reassign 14966 emacs submitter 14966 "Sebastien Vauban" severity 14966 minor tag 14966 wontfix moreinfo thanks From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Jul 27 05:48:05 2013 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Jul 2013 09:48:06 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52356 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V316b-00013K-Dx for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 05:48:05 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:35543) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V316Z-00012a-7o for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 05:48:04 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V316R-0006FY-AO for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 05:47:57 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.8 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_50 autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::11]:41665) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V316R-0006FP-7n for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 05:47:55 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37237) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V316N-0001nP-CX for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 05:47:55 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V316K-0006Da-Re for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 05:47:51 -0400 Received: from luna.schedom-europe.net ([193.109.184.86]:48746) by eggs.gnu.org with smtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V316K-0006DM-HV for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 05:47:48 -0400 Received: (qmail 27749 invoked by uid 507); 27 Jul 2013 11:47:47 +0200 Received: from ip-83-101-44-240.customer.schedom-europe.net (HELO MUNDANEUM.) (83.101.44.240) by luna.schedom-europe.net with AES128-SHA encrypted SMTP; 27 Jul 2013 11:47:39 +0200 From: "Sebastien Vauban" To: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Subject: 24.3.50; Char-displayable-p is a very long running function Organization: Sebastien Vauban X-Url: Under construction... X-Archive: encrypt Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 11:47:30 +0200 Message-ID: <86d2q4e3m5.fsf@somewhere.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.130006 (Ma Gnus v0.6) Emacs/24.3.50 (windows-nt) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::11 X-Spam-Score: -2.7 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -2.7 (--) Hello, When looking at the performance of my .emacs at startup time, I've noticed that (char-displayable-p) takes around 400 ms (!) to execute itself... --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- (setq org-ellipsis (if (char-displayable-p ?\u25B7) ;; white right-pointing triangle " \u25B7" ;; string 'org-ellipsis))) ;; face --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- This figure is obtained on my (recently bought, from January 2013) i7 laptop, when running on mains. If running on battery, that figure would even be multiplied by a factor ~3.5. Best regards, Seb -- Sebastien Vauban From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Jul 27 06:49:43 2013 Received: (at 14966) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Jul 2013 10:49:43 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52456 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V324F-0004z8-0K for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 06:49:43 -0400 Received: from mtaout20.012.net.il ([80.179.55.166]:34689) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V324B-0004yg-AW for 14966@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 06:49:40 -0400 Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout20.012.net.il by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0MQL00000COLNM00@a-mtaout20.012.net.il> for 14966@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 13:49:06 +0300 (IDT) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout20.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0MQL0001NCPU9S90@a-mtaout20.012.net.il>; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 13:49:06 +0300 (IDT) Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 13:49:08 +0300 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#14966: 24.3.50; Char-displayable-p is a very long running function In-reply-to: <86d2q4e3m5.fsf@somewhere.org> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il To: Sebastien Vauban Message-id: <83bo5oz3a3.fsf@gnu.org> References: <86d2q4e3m5.fsf@somewhere.org> X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14966 Cc: 14966@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 1.0 (+) > From: "Sebastien Vauban" > Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 11:47:30 +0200 > > When looking at the performance of my .emacs at startup time, I've noticed > that (char-displayable-p) takes around 400 ms (!) to execute itself... It calls the font driver to actually encode the character. That could look up several fonts. FWIW, I see 219 ms on my i7 Windows desktop. Unless char-displayable-p is called in an inner loop (is it?), this shouldn't really matter, should it? From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Jul 27 07:59:57 2013 Received: (at 14966) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Jul 2013 11:59:57 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52478 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V33AD-00029b-Er for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 07:59:57 -0400 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:57311) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V33AA-00029T-WC for 14966@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 07:59:55 -0400 Received: from public by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1V33A8-0004Vn-6g for 14966@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 13:59:52 +0200 Received: from mail-out.m-online.net ([212.18.0.9]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1V339u-0004KG-1f; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 13:59:38 +0200 Received: from frontend1.mail.m-online.net (unknown [192.168.8.180]) by mail-out.m-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3c2Qgs4q4Qz4KK3d; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 13:59:37 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost (dynscan1.mnet-online.de [192.168.6.68]) by mail.m-online.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3c2Qgs40RNzbbcs; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 13:59:37 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at mnet-online.de Received: from mail.mnet-online.de ([192.168.8.180]) by localhost (dynscan1.mail.m-online.net [192.168.6.68]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0jmQArn97TAu; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 13:59:36 +0200 (CEST) X-Auth-Info: SNnQZV2WAw2G5sJ2C7N2i3Zf+lrl2Q6uYkIVFp3e0EI= Received: from igel.home (ppp-93-104-141-187.dynamic.mnet-online.de [93.104.141.187]) by mail.mnet-online.de (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 13:59:36 +0200 (CEST) Received: by igel.home (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 2ED38E3296; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 13:59:36 +0200 (CEST) From: Andreas Schwab To: "Sebastien Vauban" Subject: Re: bug#14966: 24.3.50; Char-displayable-p is a very long running function References: <86d2q4e3m5.fsf@somewhere.org> X-Yow: .. My pants just went on a wild rampage through a Long Island Bowling Alley!! Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 13:59:36 +0200 In-Reply-To: <86d2q4e3m5.fsf@somewhere.org> (Sebastien Vauban's message of "Sat, 27 Jul 2013 11:47:30 +0200") Message-ID: <87y58sb4d3.fsf@igel.home> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14966 Cc: public-14966-ubl+/3LiMTaZdePnXv/OxA@plane.gmane.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -1.5 (-) "Sebastien Vauban" writes: > When looking at the performance of my .emacs at startup time, I've noticed > that (char-displayable-p) takes around 400 ms (!) to execute itself... But only the first time. Once the displaying font is known it runs fast. Andreas. -- Andreas Schwab, schwab@linux-m68k.org GPG Key fingerprint = 58CA 54C7 6D53 942B 1756 01D3 44D5 214B 8276 4ED5 "And now for something completely different." From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sat Jul 27 10:21:48 2013 Received: (at 14966) by debbugs.gnu.org; 27 Jul 2013 14:21:48 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:52923 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V35NT-0000Wv-RW for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 10:21:48 -0400 Received: from ironport2-out.teksavvy.com ([206.248.154.182]:56870) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V35NR-0000WO-8I for 14966@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 10:21:45 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: Av8EABK/CFFFpZPn/2dsb2JhbABEuzWDWRdzgh4BAQQBViMFCwsOJhIUGA0kiB4GwS2NCYQBA6R6gV6DEw X-IPAS-Result: Av8EABK/CFFFpZPn/2dsb2JhbABEuzWDWRdzgh4BAQQBViMFCwsOJhIUGA0kiB4GwS2NCYQBA6R6gV6DEw X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.84,565,1355115600"; d="scan'208";a="19971298" Received: from 69-165-147-231.dsl.teksavvy.com (HELO pastel.home) ([69.165.147.231]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP/TLS/ADH-AES256-SHA; 27 Jul 2013 10:21:33 -0400 Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 7722462E93; Sat, 27 Jul 2013 10:21:37 -0400 (EDT) From: Stefan Monnier To: "Sebastien Vauban" Subject: Re: bug#14966: 24.3.50; Char-displayable-p is a very long running function Message-ID: References: <86d2q4e3m5.fsf@somewhere.org> Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 10:21:37 -0400 In-Reply-To: <86d2q4e3m5.fsf@somewhere.org> (Sebastien Vauban's message of "Sat, 27 Jul 2013 11:47:30 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14966 Cc: 14966@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 0.3 (/) > when running on mains. If running on battery, that figure would even be > multiplied by a factor ~3.5. By "would be" you mean you haven't actually tried it? I'd expect that the 400ms are not all spent waiting for the CPU, but some non-negligible part of it is spent waiting for I/O, so it might not take much more time with a CPU running 5 times slower. Stefan From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jul 29 04:20:23 2013 Received: (at 14966) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Jul 2013 08:20:23 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55511 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V3igi-0005om-GX for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 04:20:23 -0400 Received: from dd5e0353a.access.telenet.be ([213.224.53.58]:64579 helo=mail.missioncriticalit.com) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V3igZ-0005nA-0Y for 14966@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 04:20:14 -0400 Received: from MUNDANEUM. (unknown [10.10.10.51]) by mail.missioncriticalit.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id EE5B8500D51; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 10:19:59 +0200 (CEST) From: "Sebastien Vauban" To: Stefan Monnier Subject: Re: bug#14966: 24.3.50; Char-displayable-p is a very long running function Organization: Sebastien Vauban References: <86d2q4e3m5.fsf@somewhere.org> X-Url: Under construction... X-Archive: encrypt Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 10:19:47 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Stefan Monnier's message of "Sat, 27 Jul 2013 10:21:37 -0400") Message-ID: <861u6h6an0.fsf@somewhere.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.130006 (Ma Gnus v0.6) Emacs/24.3.50 (windows-nt) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14966 Cc: 14966@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 0.0 (/) Stefan Monnier wrote: >> when running on mains. If running on battery, that figure would even be >> multiplied by a factor ~3.5. > > By "would be" you mean you haven't actually tried it? I did not try only that portion of code. The factor 3.5 is what I observe on my full Emacs config file. > I'd expect that the 400ms are not all spent waiting for the CPU, but > some non-negligible part of it is spent waiting for I/O, so it might > not take much more time with a CPU running 5 times slower. Best regards, Seb -- Sebastien Vauban From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jul 29 04:26:34 2013 Received: (at 14966) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Jul 2013 08:26:34 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:55522 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V3imn-0006Kr-61 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 04:26:33 -0400 Received: from dd5e0353a.access.telenet.be ([213.224.53.58]:4573 helo=mail.missioncriticalit.com) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V3imi-0006Jo-BM for 14966@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 04:26:30 -0400 Received: from MUNDANEUM. (unknown [10.10.10.51]) by mail.missioncriticalit.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CE1E2500BAD; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 10:18:37 +0200 (CEST) From: "Sebastien Vauban" To: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#14966: 24.3.50; Char-displayable-p is a very long running function Organization: Sebastien Vauban References: <86d2q4e3m5.fsf@somewhere.org> X-Url: Under construction... X-Archive: encrypt Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 10:18:26 +0200 In-Reply-To: (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Sat, 27 Jul 2013 13:49:08 +0300") Message-ID: <8661vt6ap9.fsf@somewhere.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.130006 (Ma Gnus v0.6) Emacs/24.3.50 (windows-nt) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Spam-Score: 0.7 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14966 Cc: 14966@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 0.7 (/) Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> From: "Sebastien Vauban" >> Date: Sat, 27 Jul 2013 11:47:30 +0200 >> >> When looking at the performance of my .emacs at startup time, I've noticed >> that (char-displayable-p) takes around 400 ms (!) to execute itself... > > It calls the font driver to actually encode the character. That could > look up several fonts. FWIW, I see 219 ms on my i7 Windows desktop. FWIW, I can't reproduce it in a minimal Emacs file (and I remember that the tests were, in fact, done on my wife's laptop, a recent i5). Minimal Emacs file: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- (defconst em/emacs-load-time-start (float-time)) ;; set default font for all frames ;; (modify-all-frames-parameters '((font . "Consolas-10"))) ;; 0.58 s (max 2.13 s on battery) ;; (modify-all-frames-parameters '((font . "Courier New-9"))) ;; 0.58 s (max 2.13 s on battery) ;; (modify-all-frames-parameters '((font . "DejaVu Sans Mono-9"))) ;; 0.07 s (max 0.25 s on battery) ;; (modify-all-frames-parameters '((font . "Lucida Sans Typewriter-9"))) ;; 0.13 s (max 0.48 s on battery) ;; (modify-all-frames-parameters '((font . "Lucida Console-9"))) ;; 0.57 s (max 2.09 s on battery) ;; default (i.e., nothing) ;; 0.58 s (max 1.83 s on battery) (defadvice message (before leuven-when-was-that activate) "Add timestamps to `message' output." (ad-set-arg 0 (concat (format-time-string "[%Y-%m-%d %T.") (substring (format-time-string "%N") 0 3) (format-time-string "] ") (ad-get-arg 0)))) (dolist (i '(1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10)) (setq org-ellipsis (if (char-displayable-p ?\u25B7) ;; white right-pointing triangle " \u25B7" ;; string 'org-ellipsis)) (message "Call nr %s" i)) (message "Loading Minimal Emacs... Done (in %.2f s)" (- (float-time) em/emacs-load-time-start)) --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- Notice that the time spent depends a lot on the chosen font!!! It is quite constant (at 0.01 s diff when on mains) for one specific font. For another font, it can be more than 8 x the time (from 0.07 to 0.58 s). FWIW, I don't understand the timing in the *Messages* buffer: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- For information about GNU Emacs and the GNU system, type C-h C-a. [2013-07-29 10:08:14.866] Call nr 1 [2013-07-29 10:08:14.869] Call nr 2 [2013-07-29 10:08:14.870] Call nr 3 [2013-07-29 10:08:14.870] Call nr 4 [2013-07-29 10:08:14.871] Call nr 5 [2013-07-29 10:08:14.872] Call nr 6 [2013-07-29 10:08:14.872] Call nr 7 [2013-07-29 10:08:14.873] Call nr 8 [2013-07-29 10:08:14.873] Call nr 9 [2013-07-29 10:08:14.874] Call nr 10 [2013-07-29 10:08:14.874] Loading Minimal Emacs... Done (in 0.58 s) --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- 14.874 (after last call) - 14.866 (after first call) is 0.008 s, not really 0.580 s!??? Something really escapes me here. > Unless char-displayable-p is called in an inner loop (is it?), this > shouldn't really matter, should it? I'm not sure to understand this sentence. What do you mean by inner loop? As I said to Andreas, I'm looking (hard) to get a startup time of Emacs under the second. So, for that purpose, yes, it does matter. Though, in general, it certainly does not hurt that much. Best regards, Seb -- Sebastien Vauban From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Mon Jul 29 12:25:04 2013 Received: (at submit) by debbugs.gnu.org; 29 Jul 2013 16:25:04 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:56435 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V3qFr-0001Lx-18 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 12:25:03 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:35512) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1V3qFn-0001L8-KU for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 12:25:00 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V3qFb-0002Zh-88 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 12:24:54 -0400 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on eggs.gnu.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-103.4 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RP_MATCHES_RCVD, USER_IN_WHITELIST autolearn=disabled version=3.3.2 Received: from lists.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::11]:45278) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V3qFb-0002ZW-3X for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 12:24:47 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:37169) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V3qFU-0003du-Sf for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 12:24:47 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V3qFO-0002Ar-6f for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 12:24:40 -0400 Received: from mtaout23.012.net.il ([80.179.55.175]:57514) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1V3qFN-0002A4-Td for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 12:24:34 -0400 Received: from conversion-daemon.a-mtaout23.012.net.il by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0MQP00E00HJEKW00@a-mtaout23.012.net.il> for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 19:24:32 +0300 (IDT) Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([87.69.4.28]) by a-mtaout23.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0MQP00EKHHKWJU20@a-mtaout23.012.net.il>; Mon, 29 Jul 2013 19:24:32 +0300 (IDT) Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 19:24:40 +0300 From: Eli Zaretskii Subject: Re: bug#14966: 24.3.50; Char-displayable-p is a very long running function In-reply-to: <86d2q16b2b.fsf@somewhere.org> X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il To: Sebastien Vauban Message-id: <83ob9lxrjr.fsf@gnu.org> References: <86d2q4e3m5.fsf@somewhere.org> <86d2q16b2b.fsf@somewhere.org> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Solaris 10 X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::11 X-Spam-Score: -4.9 (----) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: submit Cc: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -4.9 (----) > From: "Sebastien Vauban" > Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 10:10:36 +0200 > > I'm striving for a sub-second Emacs startup time, I'm only > interested in the first time... The usual way of solving this is to start Emacs only once, and leave it running at all times. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Nov 18 10:24:33 2020 Received: (at 14966) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Nov 2020 15:24:33 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36123 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kfPJx-00055J-F2 for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 10:24:33 -0500 Received: from mail-ed1-f49.google.com ([209.85.208.49]:40485) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kfPJr-000545-Ko for 14966@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 10:24:28 -0500 Received: by mail-ed1-f49.google.com with SMTP id d18so2411415edt.7 for <14966@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:24:27 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:user-agent :mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=Abmg4g7iDmvh+EOgf+ird9/gSKctlv8R00UFUsAtI4o=; b=OUiW+O1rW69XRc3iE1qNfthiOXi85Xo1i1kG3Npz/Tw2Sw3rqv1nWVYp+9fQhZaEvV 4E+mTh8g8g79hSso/KF0Mg37RTDLYYnZpvZpVryqSZBTLcGv9WAOLjdR011NvwgUaJSL 4o0AWRw9VCD9w5M01mpqrWcXVrytbENmbuCXXVvVpd9MyrirweFHVZGH9GmEpqKibfJ4 Xm0h+00xFKW+zCYHXhPlbC91f3x/sBVDJSNts3AaPf9JUDNbaNWVRe1x3a4+wA6m3+Ae d1BondqIbHmdYOwXSf4F2Y8m5bUDs28Xr1vWs3NrRpw7dgU0RNSiltQcCAy+P/rb/9H1 EMbg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM5304vk+bCSLVRTZD63s//IvkpI2kOYWvZVvf0l93k8ctWjQCJrXz E5jWI3/Zyr8AOZYr4mGT3cCwNvoIzB9pQ53K0xumgzIS X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzhEO7olLmGy4J6CpoMsI3Gud6BttYd5afp+AHmU+SVsgO8rzZhQrba/tMIdXaM8BRwMNgFk9+tbS/7hdQ0Da4= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:1114:: with SMTP id u20mr25066565edv.377.1605713062110; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:24:22 -0800 (PST) Received: from 753933720722 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:24:21 -0800 From: Stefan Kangas In-Reply-To: <83ob9lxrjr.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Mon, 29 Jul 2013 19:24:40 +0300") References: <86d2q4e3m5.fsf@somewhere.org> <86d2q16b2b.fsf@somewhere.org> <83ob9lxrjr.fsf@gnu.org> User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/28.0.50 (gnu/linux) MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:24:21 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: bug#14966: 24.3.50; Char-displayable-p is a very long running function To: Eli Zaretskii Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Score: 0.5 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14966 Cc: Sebastien Vauban , 14966@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) Eli Zaretskii writes: >> From: "Sebastien Vauban" >> Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2013 10:10:36 +0200 >> >> I'm striving for a sub-second Emacs startup time, I'm only >> interested in the first time... > > The usual way of solving this is to start Emacs only once, and leave > it running at all times. The reported problem is that `char-displayable-p' takes too long to run the first time it is called after starting a fresh Emacs. The recipe is: 0. emacs -Q 1. (benchmark-run 1 (char-displayable-p ?\u25B7)) (The above takes 200ms here.) Is this something we will want to do something about or is this all working as expected? The discussion in the bug report suggests that this is indeed something that we can live with. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Nov 18 10:24:27 2020 Received: (at control) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Nov 2020 15:24:27 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36117 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kfPJr-00054v-5Z for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 10:24:27 -0500 Received: from mail-ej1-f51.google.com ([209.85.218.51]:36888) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kfPJp-000542-NY for control@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 10:24:26 -0500 Received: by mail-ej1-f51.google.com with SMTP id f20so3303910ejz.4 for ; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:24:25 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:mime-version:date:message-id:subject:to; bh=ykPccZAaYql+pyXb7SzXz+wwTJ8TJa/bXRvq8/5dz4I=; b=OmM8gDv5a8zXMCNjQ2r4YtkGr9XghWrtSkJF7m9UZB56QdA4S5eDaMqOsqI1AqO24k LiuaRAa40NM6O4edsAFs8r/4UvVZaKEwTDIgoJ84GSyLmHGsN1D9ZTuFXX0u1jI+CVkv P0mXXHnJAN7xJGbk6nSRl6vsd1BkYM3cdd7twQ7xdPy35oZ+GSMiOsusxH48cDdpZ7NY ulehJtm1+l9I9EamI+TQwa443J41e70YdFLGH2EMk00rDw2ZjQ7qPtqcKkUNjFREv1vf FkXtj/YF+kZdOs12t9+pQrBVp5hYujXRXKdIMixnHciHKK3cA1sMzJBdmJAUlmmRSlgp fmfg== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531iiTuwv9P5rxriZiLu7eZRfvXGZmGRTsOj0CfPTCDv6C1nl9Hu nj3BBWxUy2b7KXHjC41axxvbk2iEvjJ4UOwOwiKfKy6b X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJw8+yvFbznsBdLw2vrn/ltzr0eqhe/nLpclnbh+ntF46zftMoQx0uvDhTN2tL3/4HBNUivP7WHUt0rjDuZiO5E= X-Received: by 2002:a17:906:1918:: with SMTP id a24mr1257006eje.432.1605713059790; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:24:19 -0800 (PST) Received: from 753933720722 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:24:19 -0800 From: Stefan Kangas MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:24:19 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: To: control@debbugs.gnu.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Score: 2.5 (++) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: tags 14966 moreinfo thanks Content analysis details: (2.5 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.2 HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS From and EnvelopeFrom 2nd level mail domains are different -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [209.85.218.51 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (stefankangas[at]gmail.com) 0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3 RBL: Good reputation (+3) [209.85.218.51 listed in wl.mailspike.net] 0.0 UNPARSEABLE_RELAY Informational: message has unparseable relay lines 0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL Mailspike good senders 2.0 BLANK_SUBJECT Subject is present but empty 0.2 FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN 2nd level domains in From and EnvelopeFrom freemail headers are different X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: control X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: 1.5 (+) X-Spam-Report: Spam detection software, running on the system "debbugs.gnu.org", has NOT identified this incoming email as spam. The original message has been attached to this so you can view it or label similar future email. If you have any questions, see the administrator of that system for details. Content preview: tags 14966 moreinfo thanks Content analysis details: (1.5 points, 10.0 required) pts rule name description ---- ---------------------- -------------------------------------------------- 0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3 RBL: Good reputation (+3) [209.85.218.51 listed in wl.mailspike.net] -0.0 RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE RBL: Sender listed at https://www.dnswl.org/, no trust [209.85.218.51 listed in list.dnswl.org] 0.2 HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS From and EnvelopeFrom 2nd level mail domains are different 0.0 FREEMAIL_FROM Sender email is commonly abused enduser mail provider (stefankangas[at]gmail.com) 0.0 SPF_HELO_NONE SPF: HELO does not publish an SPF Record -0.0 SPF_PASS SPF: sender matches SPF record 0.0 UNPARSEABLE_RELAY Informational: message has unparseable relay lines 0.0 RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL Mailspike good senders 2.0 BLANK_SUBJECT Subject is present but empty -1.0 MAILING_LIST_MULTI Multiple indicators imply a widely-seen list manager 0.2 FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN 2nd level domains in From and EnvelopeFrom freemail headers are different tags 14966 moreinfo thanks From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Nov 18 12:14:05 2020 Received: (at 14966) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Nov 2020 17:14:05 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36320 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kfR1w-0001WO-Pb for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 12:14:05 -0500 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:37352) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kfR1v-0001Vk-1U for 14966@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 12:14:03 -0500 Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:57451) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1kfR1p-0001KS-3j; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 12:13:57 -0500 Received: from [176.228.60.248] (port=3638 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:256) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1kfR1o-0000IY-As; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 12:13:56 -0500 Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 19:13:55 +0200 Message-Id: <83zh3epoz0.fsf@gnu.org> From: Eli Zaretskii To: Stefan Kangas In-Reply-To: (message from Stefan Kangas on Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:24:21 -0800) Subject: Re: bug#14966: 24.3.50; Char-displayable-p is a very long running function References: <86d2q4e3m5.fsf@somewhere.org> <86d2q16b2b.fsf@somewhere.org> <83ob9lxrjr.fsf@gnu.org> X-Spam-Score: -2.3 (--) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14966 Cc: sva-news@mygooglest.com, 14966@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -3.3 (---) > From: Stefan Kangas > Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:24:21 -0800 > Cc: Sebastien Vauban , 14966@debbugs.gnu.org > > 0. emacs -Q > 1. (benchmark-run 1 (char-displayable-p ?\u25B7)) > > (The above takes 200ms here.) > > Is this something we will want to do something about or is this all > working as expected? The discussion in the bug report suggests that > this is indeed something that we can live with. I think we can, indeed. From debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Wed Nov 18 13:30:10 2020 Received: (at 14966) by debbugs.gnu.org; 18 Nov 2020 18:30:10 +0000 Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:36469 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kfSDZ-0005dR-QA for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 13:30:09 -0500 Received: from mail-ed1-f48.google.com ([209.85.208.48]:36864) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1kfSDU-0005bB-BU for 14966@debbugs.gnu.org; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 13:30:06 -0500 Received: by mail-ed1-f48.google.com with SMTP id cq7so3069914edb.4 for <14966@debbugs.gnu.org>; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 10:30:04 -0800 (PST) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:in-reply-to:references:mime-version:date :message-id:subject:to:cc; bh=FqAjulvqVxiRu8uKKD0nKKp8Lj0SsyRgPKF0hOAgETU=; b=o/NPzj7qIKWjN7NJKd2v7YZjVia+U0K6lez+8t6yb21DB6cM+VsaelxDjFMmXSIJqy +RzrndhZMPrKAbzI5a+eKCMm4V88WxJ8etmFdnEQdH3/oE3nTm36d4e4k4r6cPbJ2tkT q3v0zd5HCvaexXUsTnUxyWE4gfwCdti4Tt5t/PU/7L8eDy05WR8Gz/5r4vDEQA88nmMp 37veGBkzYel9HA8BfnYpy8kHCTnCZTJRou34aFsByH4zljqbvJ94HLamt/Y5f+IUuQX5 FOH3+EAu/3dv4csBXVhirLw8OUfmH4yH85+DbvEzPAfVQ/1WD6B80asvzBmZ5jwQYdWu CSjA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM531ctmHCauHJeKhcLMw+NfcNYwbxo7WD6UlnwDZ6k4Zu8g/pln8I YlmjmScBBdNtfR6Pb+W65dkqakPOXB0ayzE9nD0= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJzS3EfHxupKsTManYffvdHJE9p2kutbarE5VUFYqRByvF/4sESXsEZrbYqeIeNhxFLfpm2WbcPxqDYQKuUo+lE= X-Received: by 2002:a05:6402:716:: with SMTP id w22mr27716040edx.214.1605724198717; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 10:29:58 -0800 (PST) Received: from 753933720722 named unknown by gmailapi.google.com with HTTPREST; Wed, 18 Nov 2020 10:29:57 -0800 From: Stefan Kangas In-Reply-To: <83zh3epoz0.fsf@gnu.org> References: <86d2q4e3m5.fsf@somewhere.org> <86d2q16b2b.fsf@somewhere.org> <83ob9lxrjr.fsf@gnu.org> <83zh3epoz0.fsf@gnu.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 10:29:57 -0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: bug#14966: 24.3.50; Char-displayable-p is a very long running function To: Eli Zaretskii Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" X-Spam-Score: 0.5 (/) X-Debbugs-Envelope-To: 14966 Cc: 14966@debbugs.gnu.org X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: debbugs-submit-bounces@debbugs.gnu.org Sender: "Debbugs-submit" X-Spam-Score: -0.5 (/) tags 14966 wontfix close 14966 thanks Eli Zaretskii writes: >> From: Stefan Kangas >> Date: Wed, 18 Nov 2020 07:24:21 -0800 >> Cc: Sebastien Vauban , 14966@debbugs.gnu.org >> >> 0. emacs -Q >> 1. (benchmark-run 1 (char-displayable-p ?\u25B7)) >> >> (The above takes 200ms here.) >> >> Is this something we will want to do something about or is this all >> working as expected? The discussion in the bug report suggests that >> this is indeed something that we can live with. > > I think we can, indeed. Thanks, closing. From unknown Thu Aug 14 21:52:54 2025 Received: (at fakecontrol) by fakecontrolmessage; To: internal_control@debbugs.gnu.org From: Debbugs Internal Request Subject: Internal Control Message-Id: bug archived. Date: Thu, 17 Dec 2020 12:24:09 +0000 User-Agent: Fakemail v42.6.9 # This is a fake control message. # # The action: # bug archived. thanks # This fakemail brought to you by your local debbugs # administrator