From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@elta.co.il>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs
Subject: Re: [patch] 21.3 executable.find - Use cache in `executable-find'
Date: 25 Mar 2004 08:49:25 +0200
Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Message-ID: <ubrmlwhe2.fsf@elta.co.il>
References: <ad3t4xar.fsf@blue.sea.net> <uk71aa463.fsf@elta.co.il>
	<y8pp51f9.fsf@blue.sea.net>
Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>
NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org
X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1080197308 20218 80.91.224.253 (25 Mar 2004 06:48:28 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 06:48:28 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Mar 25 07:48:24 2004
Return-path: <bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org>
Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173])
	by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian))
	id 1B6Of9-0005Jz-00
	for <geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org>; Thu, 25 Mar 2004 07:48:23 +0100
Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.30)
	id 1B6Oeb-00017c-MT
	for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Thu, 25 Mar 2004 01:47:49 -0500
Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.30)
	id 1B6OeS-00016E-Cm
	for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 25 Mar 2004 01:47:40 -0500
Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.30)
	id 1B6Odw-0000x5-KA
	for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Thu, 25 Mar 2004 01:47:39 -0500
Original-Received: from [207.232.27.5] (helo=WST0054)
	by monty-python.gnu.org with asmtp (Exim 4.30)
	id 1B6Odv-0000us-NA; Thu, 25 Mar 2004 01:47:08 -0500
Original-To: jari.aalto@poboxes.com (Jari Aalto+mail.linux)
In-reply-to: <y8pp51f9.fsf@blue.sea.net> (jari.aalto@poboxes.com)
X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs,
	the Swiss army knife of text editors" <bug-gnu-emacs.gnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnu-emacs>,
	<mailto:bug-gnu-emacs-request@gnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://mail.gnu.org/pipermail/bug-gnu-emacs>
List-Post: <mailto:bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:bug-gnu-emacs-request@gnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/bug-gnu-emacs>,
	<mailto:bug-gnu-emacs-request@gnu.org?subject=subscribe>
Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:7373
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.bugs:7373

> From: jari.aalto@poboxes.com (Jari Aalto+mail.linux)
> Date: Thu, 25 Mar 2004 00:24:10 +0200
> 
> | Any measurements to show that this indeed yields significant savings
> | in Emacs?
> 
> No, but just common sense.

My common sense says ``profile before you optimize''.

> I have 50 directories in path and depending
> just where the /bin might be it could take ages to find same programs
> all again.

I'd like to know how long is ``ages''.  With today's caching OSes,
you'd be surprised how fast that could be.

I could be wrong, of course, but only measurements will prove or
disprove that.