Patches

[Richard Kimberly Heck]

On 11/5/20 5:43 AM, Yuriy Skalko wrote:
>> Yes, updateMacros is a pain, it is actually a O(n^2) algorithm which 
>> kills performance for big documents. But it is a bit scary and I 
>> never dared changing it :)
>>
>> JMarc
>
> Yes, macros implementation is really tangled. Maybe at first we can 
> try to minimize calling updateMacros?
That is definitely the goal. But, as you saw with 9e7832915f, this is 
all very fragile.

> Also attaching several patches with some improvements.

These all look ok to me, so go ahead with them, with the exception of 
#2. I *think* this is probably redundant---it was done in updateBuffer, 
yes---but other things were done after that, so it may or may not 
actually be redundant in this case.

But I'd suggest we not try to untangle this further until after 2.4.0 
(or that all such work go into a feature branch). This is 
super-dangerous stuff. But maybe if a bunch of us went at it shortly 
after that release, we could make some progress.

Riki