CJK support makes evil-forward-word-begin slow

Wed Aug 1 08:55:34 CEST 2012

I'm having the same issue, with byte compiled evil. The funniest thing
is how this
issue is very unreliable: sometimes, when emacs was freshly start it works
without problems and later after some work, it became quite sluggish.

On other hand 'b' is still working without problems.

Not sure is this related to similar issue, but after some time (when emacs is
running in daemon mode) with couple of files and eshell, the whole editing
experience became sluggish; could this be related to evil too, as I didn't catch
the similar issue report on emacs list?

Maybe some benchmarking against Viper mode (or automate it inside Makefile)
can show weak points. From time to time I start viper for comparison, and always
get amazed how responsive it is, no matter how many buffers or modes are opened.

Regards,
Sanel

On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 11:32 PM, Barry OReilly <gundaetiapo at gmail.com> wrote:
> You byte compiled Evil right?  'make' does it.
>
>
>
>
> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 4:29 PM, Nikolai Weibull <now at bitwi.se> wrote:
>>
>> On Tue, Jul 31, 2012 at 10:11 PM, Frank Fischer
>> <frank-fischer at shadow-soft.de> wrote:
>> > Am Tue, 31 Jul 2012 17:40:49 +0200
>> > schrieb Nikolai Weibull <now at 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 ...
>>
>> Ah, so it was a question of computing power, after all.
>>
>> >> 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).
>>
>> I’m on a 2 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo.  This work your talking about must
>> 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 at lists.ourproject.org
>> https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/implementations-list
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> implementations-list mailing list
> implementations-list at lists.ourproject.org
> https://lists.ourproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/implementations-list
>