GNU bug report logs - #48841
fido-mode is slower than ido-mode with similar settings

Previous Next

Full log

Message #299 received at 48841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org (full text, mbox):

From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
To: Daniel Mendler <mail <at> daniel-mendler.de>
Cc: monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca, 48841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, dgutov <at> yandex.ru,
 joaotavora <at> gmail.com, larsi <at> gnus.org, 47711 <at> debbugs.gnu.org
Subject: Re: bug#47711: bug#48841: bug#47711: [PATCH VERSION 2] Add new
 `completion-filter-completions` API and deferred highlighting
Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2021 15:43:59 +0300

> Cc: Dmitry Gutov <dgutov <at> yandex.ru>, Lars Ingebrigtsen <larsi <at> gnus.org>,
>  47711 <at> debbugs.gnu.org, 48841 <at> debbugs.gnu.org,
>  Stefan Monnier <monnier <at> iro.umontreal.ca>, Eli Zaretskii <eliz <at> gnu.org>
> From: Daniel Mendler <mail <at> daniel-mendler.de>
> Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2021 14:05:54 +0200
> 
> João, the discussion is clearly not progressing. I propose that we both
> take a step back and let the Emacs maintainers, who participated in this
> discussion, decide on how to proceed. It seems to me that all arguments
> and data has been presented and there is no need for further
> reiterations in more and more colorful language.

As I wrote elsewhere, I'd like to see the performance aspects of this
to be presented from both sides, and agreed upon.  I don't think we
can make the decision before we have performance data we all agree
about.  The other pros and cons are all of qualitative nature, and
involve intuition, personal experience, and personal preferences, so
each one will have their own balance.  But performance is both basic
and qualitative, and we should have the facts and agree on them.

Previous Next

GNU bug tracking system
Copyright (C) 1999 Darren O. Benham, 1997,2003 nCipher Corporation Ltd, 1994-97 Ian Jackson.