GNU bug report logs -
#45898
27.1; wedged in redisplay again
Previous Next
Full log
View this message in rfc822 format
> From: Gerd Möllmann <gerd.moellmann <at> gmail.com>
> Date: Sat, 25 Jun 2022 13:10:14 +0200
> Cc: 45898 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
>
> > You mean, just update_ticks? That's too general, IMO. I'd like
> > people to have an idea what that does when they just see the call.
> >
> > But I'm not good with names.
>
> I love update_ticks! And I'm good with names, trust me ;-). And I'm volunteering to do the work!
Fine with me, have fun.
> >> You mean a case, where small numbers of ticks sum up by calling these Lisp functions often enough?
> >
> > Actually, I meant something even simpler: a Lisp program that calls,
> > say, regexp search repeatedly, to accumulate enough ticks that would
> > signal an error, thus aborting that Lisp program.
>
> That's 100% what I also meant. Sorry for not being clear.
>
> Do you think redisplaying_p would suffice as an indicator?
>
> That should be true if and only if redisplay_internal is in the call stack. Also, redisplay_internal is a no-op if called recursively. Or better said, both used to be the case.
Yes, I know; and it's still the case. Originally, I indeed only
looked at redisplaying_p. But then cases with C-n and C-v wouldn't be
caught, because these commands, although they call the display code,
run without redisplay_internal in the call stack. And very sluggish
response from these and similar commands is generally perceived as
"redisplay problems". So I wanted to catch them as well, without
waiting for redisplay cycle they cause (which by itself may or may not
be "too slow" -- just moving the cursor is an optimization there, as
you know).
This bug report was last modified 2 years and 356 days ago.
Previous Next
GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham,
1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd,
1994-97 Ian Jackson.