From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: init_buffer PWD fix Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 14:00:49 +0300 (IDT) Sender: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org Message-ID: References: NNTP-Posting-Host: localhost.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1019556211 15989 127.0.0.1 (23 Apr 2002 10:03:31 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 23 Apr 2002 10:03:31 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org, Paul Eggert , knagano@sodan.org Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.33 #1 (Debian)) id 16zx91-00049m-00 for ; Tue, 23 Apr 2002 12:03:31 +0200 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([199.232.76.164]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.12 #1 (Debian)) id 16zxA9-00083l-00 for ; Tue, 23 Apr 2002 12:04:41 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=fencepost.gnu.org) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16zx8x-0007mk-00; Tue, 23 Apr 2002 06:03:27 -0400 Original-Received: from is.elta.co.il ([199.203.121.2]) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 3.34 #1 (Debian)) id 16zx7x-0003af-00 for ; Tue, 23 Apr 2002 06:02:26 -0400 Original-Received: from is (is [199.203.121.2]) by is.elta.co.il (8.9.3/8.8.8) with SMTP id OAA25887; Tue, 23 Apr 2002 14:00:50 +0300 (IDT) X-Sender: eliz@is Original-To: MIYASHITA Hisashi In-Reply-To: Errors-To: emacs-devel-admin@gnu.org X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.0.9 Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Post: List-Subscribe: , List-Id: Emacs development discussions. List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:3089 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:3089 On Tue, 23 Apr 2002, MIYASHITA Hisashi wrote: > But, in the first place, is this code necessary on all platform? > Even now, is it really efficient on almost all of the platforms? > I don't think we should stick to such hacked code for the simple > job to get the current directory. I think Emacs does that because the system call invoked by `getcwd' is much slower on Unix than an access to the environment variables followed by a call to `stat'. If that is no longer true, we could as well remove the `getenv' part and call `getcwd' directly. However, the case of calling `stat' on directories should be fixed in the Windows port anyhow, IMHO, even if it is irrelevant to the issue of PWD.