On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 10:11 PM, Frank FischerAh, so it was a question of computing power, after all.
<frank-fischer@shadow-soft.de> wrote:
> Am Tue, 31 Jul 2012 17:40:49 +0200
> schrieb Nikolai Weibull <now@bitwi.se>:
>> 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 ...
I’m on a 2 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo. This work your talking about must
>> 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).
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
implementations-list@lists.ourproject.org
https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/implementations-list