Re: State of the overlay tree branch?

[Eli Zaretskii]

> From: Sebastian Sturm <address@hidden>
> Date: Mon, 19 Mar 2018 00:03:11 +0100
> 
> Again, however, line-number-at-pos shows up as a large CPU time consumer 
> in the profiler report, and benchmark-run still reports several ms per 
> invocation (though this time it's usually around 2 to 4 ms instead of 
> the 20 to 25 I measured earlier), so I'd still be very much interested 
> in a faster line-number-at-pos implementation.

2 to 4 ms for 6 calls is as fast as you can get for a 70K file.  But
you should be able to issue just one call, and replace the other 5
with relative counting using count-lines or forward-line, which should
then count only a small number of lines from the original location.
Right?