On Thu, Aug 04, 2022 at 11:35:31PM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote: > On Sun, Jul 31, 2022 at 07:29:35AM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > On Sun, Jul 31, 2022 at 11:34:25AM +0200, Pavel Sanda wrote: > > > On Sun, Jul 31, 2022 at 05:16:17AM -0400, Scott Kostyshak wrote: > > > > I'm on vacation and won't be able to test for a few weeks. Can you do > > > > the test I described before? Just select a big document, and then hold > > > > Shift + <UP> to decrease the selection towards the beginning of the > > > > document. I just counted using a wrist stopwatch and compared > > > > with/without the patch. > > > > > > I did that already and haven't seen noticeable lag. But I might have too > > > powerful machine, that's why I ask. Anyway, increasing delay would be > > > trivial change later. > > That's good enough for me. 0.5 seems fine to me and I imagine it could > > Attached is a newer version. Actually something like 4th rewrite - I figured > that even the combination of mid-sized document and very fast keyboard repeat > rates has already visible interference from stats computation. > > I ended with more conservative approach - stats updates have now 5s sampling > rate and I think that's totally fine for casual statusbar look how your > document is doing. > > The only situation when sampling rate get's back 0.5s is when small > piece (<5000 chars) of text is being selected - that's when you need > instant visual feedback (and it's the initial motivation for this whole > patch).
I think it's a nice idea to change the timer based on how many characters there are. > I suggest we put this into master and let ppl test on their machines > if any noticeable changes are visible when editing documents. At worst > we can disable this feature by default. Sounds good to me. Thanks for the patch updates. I suggest to commit now. I have a few comments that are from a quick look of the patch. Please ignore them if they don't make sense or you disagree. They are really picky, but I could not help it. Sorry :) 1. I initially thought "chars_blanks" was the number of blank characters. I think it is worth the longer name to put "chars_with_blanks" or "chars_w_blanks". I promise I will not mind if you diagree and keep "chars_blanks". 2. Some consts are defined with descriptions which is helpful for reading (and for anyone who wants to tweak). There is also a 5000 in "if (chars_blanks < 5000 && cur.selection())". Would it make sense to make the 5000 a const variable along with the others? 3. The name of the setting is "Show Document Statistics". I wonder if it would be helpful to mention something about selection, because when I see "document" I think "the full document". Would it be too verbose to have "Show Document (or Selection) Statistics" ? Or perhaps remove "document", e.g., "Show Statistics". Scott
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- lyx-devel mailing list lyx-devel@lists.lyx.org http://lists.lyx.org/mailman/listinfo/lyx-devel
