From xemacs-m  Mon Feb 24 16:31:18 1997
Received: from mailhost.lanl.gov (mailhost.lanl.gov [128.165.3.12])
	by xemacs.org (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id QAA19336
	for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Mon, 24 Feb 1997 16:31:17 -0600 (CST)
Received: from branagh.ta52.lanl.gov (branagh.ta52.lanl.gov [128.165.144.9]) by mailhost.lanl.gov (8.8.5/8.8.3) with SMTP id PAA12116 for <xemacs-beta@xemacs.org>; Mon, 24 Feb 1997 15:31:17 -0700 (MST)
Received: by branagh.ta52.lanl.gov (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4)
	id PAA23264; Mon, 24 Feb 1997 15:27:18 -0700
Date: Mon, 24 Feb 1997 15:27:18 -0700
Message-Id: <199702242227.PAA23264@branagh.ta52.lanl.gov>
From: "John A. Turner" <turner@branagh.ta52.lanl.gov>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
To: xemacs-beta@xemacs.org
Subject: Re: [19.15-b95 / 20.1-b2] lazy-lock lossage?
In-Reply-To: <vk67zhvr5f.fsf@cdc.noaa.gov>
References: <vk67zhvr5f.fsf@cdc.noaa.gov>
Reply-To: turner@lanl.gov

Mark Borges writes:

 > Something bizarre is going on with lazy-lock and font-locking of
 > compilation buffers. For instance, visiting the efs directory and then
 > doing `M-x grep -in highlight dired*.el' (never mind what I was

[snip]

 > Not to mention the fact that it takes an extremely long time to
 > finish. Of course, the answer is really:

[snip]

 > This is how I was previously enabling lazy-lock:
 > 
 >   ;(autoload 'turn-on-lazy-lock "lazy-lock"
 >   ;  "Unconditionally turn on Lazy Lock mode.")
 >   ;(add-hook 'font-lock-mode-hook 'turn-on-lazy-lock)
 > 
 > But just evaling those (uncommented) lines after an `xemacs -q' does
 > not trigger the bug. However, if I don't enable lazy-lock and leave
 > those lines commented out, it works fine, too, which leads me to
 > believe it is some interaction with lazy-lock.

This fits with my *shell* problems.  Starting with -q doesn't exhibit
the problem, but starting with -q and then loading my .xemacs-options,
which turns on lazy-lock, does.

And I've seen slowness in cvs-update, which I guess is similar to
doing a grep or a compile or whatever.

I just started everything up again with lazy-lock disabled, and my
shell buffer seems to be fine.

-- 
John Turner
http://www.lanl.gov/home/turner

