From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Richard Stallman Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: IRC client for Emacs Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 13:05:39 -0600 (MDT) Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: <200208271905.g7RJ5dW13010@wijiji.santafe.edu> References: <873ctot40n.fsf@emacswiki.org> <20020809223753.955308.FMU31823@piglet.prv.splode.com> <200208110355.g7B3tOo06247@wijiji.santafe.edu> <877kixtg8w.fsf@emacswiki.org> <20020811160610.424772.FMU9022@piglet.prv.splode.com> <87fzxhs1ia.fsf@emacswiki.org> <200208151954.g7FJsut07968@wijiji.santafe.edu> <20020820143817.816033.FMU965@piglet.prv.splode.com> <200208210153.g7L1r4W10188@wijiji.santafe.edu> <20020820190744.375246.FMU965@piglet.prv.splode.com> <200208220156.g7M1uvx10414@wijiji.santafe.edu> <20020821193900.557945.FMU965@piglet.prv.splode.com> <200208240233.g7O2XW011692@wijiji.santafe.edu> <200208250527.g7P5RNm12107@wijiji.santafe.edu> <20020826112912.937066.FMU965@piglet.prv.splode.com> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1030475549 6235 127.0.0.1 (27 Aug 2002 19:12:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 27 Aug 2002 19:12:29 +0000 (UTC) Cc: ueno@unixuser.org, alex@emacswiki.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 17jllK-0001cN-00 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 21:12:26 +0200 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 17jmGl-0003pb-00 for ; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 21:44:56 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 17jlmf-0007Q5-00; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 15:13:49 -0400 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 17jlf0-0005aP-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 15:05:54 -0400 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.10) id 17jleo-0005XC-00 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 15:05:47 -0400 Original-Received: from pele.santafe.edu ([192.12.12.119]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.10) id 17jlen-0005WP-00; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 15:05:41 -0400 Original-Received: from wijiji.santafe.edu (wijiji [192.12.12.5]) by pele.santafe.edu (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.6) with ESMTP id g7RJ66501874; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 13:06:06 -0600 (MDT) Original-Received: (from rms@localhost) by wijiji.santafe.edu (8.11.6+Sun/8.9.3) id g7RJ5dW13010; Tue, 27 Aug 2002 13:05:39 -0600 (MDT) X-Authentication-Warning: wijiji.santafe.edu: rms set sender to rms@wijiji using -f Original-To: friedman@splode.com In-Reply-To: <20020826112912.937066.FMU965@piglet.prv.splode.com> (message from Noah Friedman on Mon, 26 Aug 2002 11:29:12 -0700 (PDT)) Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.11 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:6995 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:6995 I think this might be ok, but I'm uncertain whether implementing the hash function in elisp is worth the computation time vs. just using C hashtables, or whether it's better to memoize results parsed out of the MO file into a hashtable for all future references. Using C hashtables would mean using a lot more space, I would expect. Saving that space is the reason for reading directly out of the buffer rather than making an Emacs hash table. However, this depends on how much excess space there is in an MO file. You could do the computation and see which one saves how much space. I think we need the code to parse the MO file in any case, regardless of whether you do this to look up each string or to parse the file just once to put the data in an Emacs hash table. So I don't see how using the Emacs table avoids any code. Using a hash table to memoize would not add too much space, and might be worth doing if it really speeds things up. However, I suspect things will be fast enough without it so it isn't worth doing.