From: npostavs@users.sourceforge.net
To: Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com>
Cc: 24353@debbugs.gnu.org, "Clément Pit--Claudel" <clement.pit@gmail.com>
Subject: bug#24353: 25.1.1: looking-back wrong info
Date: Sat, 03 Sep 2016 14:31:33 -0400 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <87twdwal8a.fsf@users.sourceforge.net> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <aa4844fe-f893-4829-8777-42f28ae6a1ab@default> (Drew Adams's message of "Sat, 3 Sep 2016 11:10:38 -0700 (PDT)")
Drew Adams <drew.adams@oracle.com> writes:
> The right fix is to have the doc do three things:
>
> 1. Be honest about the signature.
Casting this as a moral issue (about "honesty") doesn't seem to be
constructive. Anyway, the whole point of advertised-calling-convention
is to advertise a signature different from the actual implemented one.
> 2. Recommend strongly that you use LIMIT.
> 3. Say WHY you should use LIMIT: not doing so can lead
> to poor performance.
The doc string already says
LIMIT if non-nil speeds up the search by specifying a minimum
starting position, to avoid checking matches that would start
before LIMIT.
>
> Had #2 and #3 been in the doc when you (presumably) first
> consulted it, you would likely have included LIMIT, and
> there would be no need to "upgrade" your code now.
>
> Is there a reason to avoid using `looking-back', even if
> LIMIT is provided? It too should be mentioned in the doc.
The docstring already says
As a general recommendation, try to avoid using ‘looking-back’
wherever possible, since it is slow.
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2016-09-03 18:31 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 23+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2016-09-02 8:48 bug#24353: 25.1.1: looking-back wrong info Andreas Röhler
2016-09-02 8:58 ` Eli Zaretskii
2016-09-02 9:57 ` Andreas Röhler
2016-09-02 10:04 ` Eli Zaretskii
2016-09-02 17:51 ` Drew Adams
2016-09-02 19:03 ` Eli Zaretskii
2016-09-02 20:10 ` Dmitry Gutov
2016-09-02 23:59 ` Drew Adams
2016-09-03 0:03 ` Dmitry Gutov
2016-09-03 0:10 ` Drew Adams
2016-09-03 0:14 ` npostavs
2016-09-03 0:15 ` Dmitry Gutov
2016-09-03 0:28 ` Drew Adams
2016-09-03 17:35 ` Clément Pit--Claudel
2016-09-03 18:10 ` Drew Adams
2016-09-03 18:24 ` Clément Pit--Claudel
2016-09-03 18:31 ` npostavs [this message]
2016-09-03 18:57 ` Drew Adams
2016-09-04 13:08 ` Michael Heerdegen
2016-09-03 17:50 ` Clément Pit--Claudel
2016-09-03 18:42 ` Drew Adams
2016-09-03 18:52 ` Eli Zaretskii
[not found] <<e554564c-50a0-8c71-3b79-183ffd54b9c3@easy-emacs.de>
[not found] ` <<83lgzael08.fsf@gnu.org>
[not found] ` <<a404cb34-311e-3fb3-dde8-4340e57c97e5@easy-emacs.de>
[not found] ` <<83k2euehyc.fsf@gnu.org>
[not found] ` <<bf60cf1c-b9b9-4505-ab9f-d518dcf1725c@default>
[not found] ` <<83eg52dszc.fsf@gnu.org>
2016-09-02 20:03 ` Drew Adams
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
List information: https://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=87twdwal8a.fsf@users.sourceforge.net \
--to=npostavs@users.sourceforge.net \
--cc=24353@debbugs.gnu.org \
--cc=clement.pit@gmail.com \
--cc=drew.adams@oracle.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
Code repositories for project(s) associated with this public inbox
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs.git
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for read-only IMAP folder(s) and NNTP newsgroup(s).