From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: martin rudalics Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#17284: Host name completion in shell mode take 45 seconds Date: Sat, 04 Apr 2015 18:00:07 +0200 Message-ID: <55200A87.9050605@gmx.at> References: <87a8ypixcn.fsf@yahoo.fr> <4982c9c5-f87b-41f0-8e79-30fb65de6e99@default> <551FA100.2040208@gmx.at> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1428163320 22486 80.91.229.3 (4 Apr 2015 16:02:00 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 4 Apr 2015 16:02:00 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 17284@debbugs.gnu.org To: Drew Adams , Svend Sorensen , Nicolas Richard Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Apr 04 18:01:49 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@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 1YeQW5-0007gA-6e for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 04 Apr 2015 18:01:49 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:33603 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YeQW4-0006ls-GM for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Sat, 04 Apr 2015 12:01:48 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:43998) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YeQVM-0005Od-Gf for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 04 Apr 2015 12:01:05 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YeQVL-0001CO-HR for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 04 Apr 2015 12:01:04 -0400 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.43]:55084) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1YeQVL-0001CH-4b for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 04 Apr 2015 12:01:03 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1YeQVK-0007q5-T3 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Sat, 04 Apr 2015 12:01:03 -0400 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: martin rudalics Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Sat, 04 Apr 2015 16:01:02 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 17284 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 17284-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B17284.142816322730075 (code B ref 17284); Sat, 04 Apr 2015 16:01:02 +0000 Original-Received: (at 17284) by debbugs.gnu.org; 4 Apr 2015 16:00:27 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:44859 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1YeQUk-0007p0-Pi for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 04 Apr 2015 12:00:27 -0400 Original-Received: from mout.gmx.net ([212.227.17.22]:55720) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from ) id 1YeQUh-0007ob-M8 for 17284@debbugs.gnu.org; Sat, 04 Apr 2015 12:00:24 -0400 Original-Received: from [178.189.205.199] ([178.189.205.199]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx101) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0MfzEP-1Z1tK92rMz-00NULj; Sat, 04 Apr 2015 18:00:16 +0200 In-Reply-To: X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:lxHmJ0hFzBeJ19AGmAn4AFhVW/xGq5lUxYPZuJXU4jfh/3BD0Lq 2cP2MY8RBNaA/WhLvDEodQFmDchYXuAMA2m75MHlr4v6UbBWfDn5/aPXvAJ3a3eTHlaww9O T0cUyppEdhvg1SLIuritRbuabxfQKkmogWMQeQsJ1QiEpHPdilzeXI1AEOSNa5oAyka06L4 9FMf8rxdXTcMHyNKsaLZQ== X-UI-Out-Filterresults: notjunk:1; X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 3.x X-Received-From: 140.186.70.43 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:101191 Archived-At: > `buffer-substring-no-properties' is defined in C. I can't tell > whether this is more efficient because of that or less efficient > because it creates a potentially giant string before starting to > compare. I was trying to compare starting from the far end, > thinking that that might lead to earlier failure detection. I got your idea. But you also said that what we are handling here is "typically a short string" ;-) martin