From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Luc Teirlinck Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: autorevert.el Date: Mon, 15 Mar 2004 22:56:31 -0600 (CST) Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Message-ID: <200403160456.i2G4uVL14097@raven.dms.auburn.edu> References: <200403022319.i22NJbG01259@raven.dms.auburn.edu> <200403040508.i2458W811551@raven.dms.auburn.edu> <200403050400.i2540VQ21715@raven.dms.auburn.edu> <200403130310.i2D3A8w28676@raven.dms.auburn.edu> <200403150008.i2F083x04382@raven.dms.auburn.edu> NNTP-Posting-Host: deer.gmane.org X-Trace: sea.gmane.org 1079413783 31435 80.91.224.253 (16 Mar 2004 05:09:43 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@sea.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 16 Mar 2004 05:09:43 +0000 (UTC) Cc: monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Tue Mar 16 06:09:38 2004 Return-path: Original-Received: from quimby.gnus.org ([80.91.224.244]) by deer.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1B36pd-0005Vy-00 for ; Tue, 16 Mar 2004 06:09:37 +0100 Original-Received: from monty-python.gnu.org ([199.232.76.173]) by quimby.gnus.org with esmtp (Exim 3.35 #1 (Debian)) id 1B36pd-0005AW-00 for ; Tue, 16 Mar 2004 06:09:37 +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 1B36fG-0002a7-PJ for emacs-devel@quimby.gnus.org; Mon, 15 Mar 2004 23:58:54 -0500 Original-Received: from list by monty-python.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.30) id 1B36fA-0002ZX-70 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Mar 2004 23:58:48 -0500 Original-Received: from mail by monty-python.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.30) id 1B36ed-0002Ny-Jl for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Mar 2004 23:58:46 -0500 Original-Received: from [131.204.53.104] (helo=manatee.dms.auburn.edu) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.30) id 1B36ed-0002Lv-9Q for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Mar 2004 23:58:15 -0500 Original-Received: from raven.dms.auburn.edu (raven.dms.auburn.edu [131.204.53.29]) by manatee.dms.auburn.edu (8.12.10/8.12.10) with ESMTP id i2G4w3Kt007388; Mon, 15 Mar 2004 22:58:03 -0600 (CST) Original-Received: (from teirllm@localhost) by raven.dms.auburn.edu (8.11.6+Sun/8.11.6) id i2G4uVL14097; Mon, 15 Mar 2004 22:56:31 -0600 (CST) X-Authentication-Warning: raven.dms.auburn.edu: teirllm set sender to teirllm@dms.auburn.edu using -f Original-To: eliz@elta.co.il In-reply-to: (message from Eli Zaretskii on 15 Mar 2004 09:04:03 +0200) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.4 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+emacs-devel=quimby.gnus.org@gnu.org Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:20520 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.devel:20520 Eli Zaretskii wrote: > For dired buffers, visited-file-modtime works Only on Posix systems, btw. On MS-Windows, the directory's time stamp does not change when you add or remove files. That would mean that on MS-Windows, you also would not always (or even rarely) get the "Directory has changed on disk; type g to update Dired" massages by which dired warns you that the information you are getting is obsolete. Indeed, the way Auto Revert Mode would check whether a dired buffer needs reverting _after my patch is applied_ would be identical to the way Dired decides whether it needs to print that message. Anyway, I believe I have no choice but to change the current handling of dired buffers by autorevert, because the present code is wrong and chews up tons of CPU. I have the impression that the current code takes substantially more time checking whether a dired buffer needs reverting than it would take to actually revert it. On top of that, the results of the check are completely incorrect. What this could mean is that autoreverting of dired buffers may not work on MS-Windows or maybe that, on MS-windows, one could just automatically autorevert dired buffers every auto-revert-interval seconds, assuming one has a reasonably fast computer (admittedly a very suboptimal solution). Once I have actually applied my patch, people could experiment and see what really happens on various operating systems. Sincerely, Luc.