Re: Bug #25608 and the comment-cache branch

[Alan Mackenzie]

Hello, Dmitry.

On Fri, Feb 03, 2017 at 00:14:12 +0200, Dmitry Gutov wrote:
> On 02.02.2017 22:24, Alan Mackenzie wrote:

> > I think we are all agreed that Emacs should handle correctly formed
> > comments in C.  comment-cache does correctly handle comments, and it has
> > been shown to be essentially no slower than master.

> Alan, you seem to have abandoned the previous discussion. Why don't we 
> finish it first?

> You have been asked for some extra measurements, including the ones 
> using the alternative patch.

Perhaps, for clarity's sake, you could post this alternative patch here,
or if it's big, put it into a scratch branch.  Then, at least we'll all
know that we're talking about the same thing.

> I still haven't seen those yet.

I'm not sure what you want them for.  The "alternative patch" didn't
scan comments correctly all the time when I looked at it, just as the
current back_comment doesn't.  But, post the patch, remind me precisely
what you want tested, and I'll do it.

Constructive criticism of comment-cache would be most welcome.

-- 
Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).