From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Dmitry Gutov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Emacs contributions, C and Lisp Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 22:51:47 +0200 Message-ID: <87ppmhecd8.fsf@yandex.ru> References: <83mwhucg1h.fsf@gnu.org> <878ute589i.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <83d2iqc84m.fsf@gnu.org> <87wqgxkcr9.fsf@yandex.ru> <834n41db0d.fsf@gnu.org> <52FE2985.4070703@yandex.ru> <831tz5daes.fsf@gnu.org> <8738jlohd6.fsf@yandex.ru> <83txc1bl83.fsf@gnu.org> <5300189A.9090208@yandex.ru> <83wqgv9fbj.fsf@gnu.org> <20140216180712.236069f6@forcix.jorgenschaefer.de> <87wqgr4v18.fsf@yandex.ru> <53064BD0.7070009@yandex.ru> <87ha7tr5bo.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1392929527 2565 80.91.229.3 (20 Feb 2014 20:52:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 20 Feb 2014 20:52:07 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: David Kastrup Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Feb 20 21:52:15 2014 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1WGabK-0003PZ-SM for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 21:52:11 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:40571 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WGabK-0005hx-2V for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 15:52:10 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54386) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WGabC-0005hW-Cx for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 15:52:07 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WGab7-0006rc-3e for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 15:52:02 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-ea0-x22a.google.com ([2a00:1450:4013:c01::22a]:40165) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1WGab6-0006rO-SZ; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 15:51:57 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-ea0-f170.google.com with SMTP id g15so1149036eak.15 for ; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 12:51:55 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=sender:from:to:cc:subject:references:date:in-reply-to:message-id :user-agent:mime-version:content-type; bh=KMtQWt85PrOCZIindS8WFEATpuGYiHQXcNlQIZG7BaA=; b=dqZ/crpMsAEIEcj9OyVEf6tWOdQWmmhpB9AY0a9R8UwWLwNEfHRavLz3V5X4v+g+2U Cxx6vp0Wcf4S7oZCe/fUmA690bRWxN3xV025VFWbUymx7KIoCFcAuSAbrLQdieNPY7E9 rleo8dt+ZVpAzHlo4oEQgXmm0udo5A8dFIcMqilEHf3fhGrbupnBnYt+EyX08TE8QZKo RR5nWqIen44CH4WzVtQAjcZrmKP+d95byMsDwP++pl2xT2UA21ZWZxYkoIdB/LDaljew Lw9kBdi1Mujhh6UlYADLMaoYNPHaDiI3IEdt9qHPeyePJFl0/aMi90o7vcjCb3nnL6ut kQ8Q== X-Received: by 10.15.81.197 with SMTP id x45mr3754902eey.28.1392929515646; Thu, 20 Feb 2014 12:51:55 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from axl ([93.109.195.252]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPSA id j42sm18128258eep.21.2014.02.20.12.51.53 for (version=TLSv1.2 cipher=RC4-SHA bits=128/128); Thu, 20 Feb 2014 12:51:54 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <87ha7tr5bo.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> (David Kastrup's message of "Thu, 20 Feb 2014 19:45:31 +0100") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Error: Malformed IPv6 address (bad octet value). X-Received-From: 2a00:1450:4013:c01::22a X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:169791 Archived-At: David Kastrup writes: > I think it would make sense to pass that info via pipe or socket and > receive the output similarly. That way each file only needs to get > parsed once, not repeatedly for every completion. Isn't this what I wrote in the next paragraph, after the one you quoted? I don't see how you would parse the file only once, though. The user types a new word -> you have to parse it again, no?