From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Tino Calancha Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#25618: 25.1.91; More precise limit for tagging expensive tests Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 18:28:24 +0900 Message-ID: <75fc3765-bbef-342b-f986-eb0f4a2f35b9@gmail.com> References: <87inoqqdgr.fsf@calancha-pc> <83d1ex99yh.fsf@gnu.org> <83efz64ehp.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: blaine.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: blaine.gmane.org 1486718960 24130 195.159.176.226 (10 Feb 2017 09:29:20 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@blaine.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 09:29:20 +0000 (UTC) User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:45.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/45.7.1 Cc: 25618@debbugs.gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Feb 10 10:29:16 2017 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by blaine.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cc7Vx-00060i-Nr for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 10:29:13 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42679 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cc7W3-0003Si-7z for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 04:29:19 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:56022) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cc7Vr-0003Pr-3Q for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 04:29:08 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cc7Vm-0007vq-2t for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 04:29:07 -0500 Original-Received: from debbugs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.43]:35609) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1cc7Vl-0007vm-W0 for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 04:29:02 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-debbugs by debbugs.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cc7Vl-0002kN-NA for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 04:29:01 -0500 X-Loop: help-debbugs@gnu.org Resent-From: Tino Calancha Original-Sender: "Debbugs-submit" Resent-CC: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org Resent-Date: Fri, 10 Feb 2017 09:29:01 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: help-debbugs@gnu.org X-GNU-PR-Message: followup 25618 X-GNU-PR-Package: emacs X-GNU-PR-Keywords: wontfix Original-Received: via spool by 25618-submit@debbugs.gnu.org id=B25618.148671891610526 (code B ref 25618); Fri, 10 Feb 2017 09:29:01 +0000 Original-Received: (at 25618) by debbugs.gnu.org; 10 Feb 2017 09:28:36 +0000 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:33808 helo=debbugs.gnu.org) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cc7VL-0002ji-Vz for submit@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 04:28:36 -0500 Original-Received: from mail-pf0-f175.google.com ([209.85.192.175]:34072) by debbugs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.84_2) (envelope-from ) id 1cc7VJ-0002jU-5n for 25618@debbugs.gnu.org; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 04:28:34 -0500 Original-Received: by mail-pf0-f175.google.com with SMTP id e4so8167260pfg.1 for <25618@debbugs.gnu.org>; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 01:28:33 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date:user-agent :mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=6DANriwXsz0ixDAZsNuLYgL7jqaRG16/MnzOlkdwc3A=; b=bNeqYuX5L6BaVB78UqIKi8EeE5Zd7enPDjD+v0vAqYztrRzeNjuxsIFmf3i5Nlpo1s uWYzrbSXpwk4oKpRh/2AkdM+eLwXfScE1oRJXvAnPZZvMuNFHA1G3vYUety/MQDpi5MT ics/ckMDaTDwHM8173MxhI0ByGneJI7u7bTYYMGAe543QGkYUO97ypok0uAByurKbAkt kWggLSd5hULGQAJxhy8NjoN5gRYjrD0VVuv1oMilI82OEbkMU2mohaAkMwaBiZRMDGek lSAwzA7HQkV3VAX10W0GGZN6dt84h9ra+SxE2BlLbMENNhoG0G7hxeDBTONjHd9oES+F pbBQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:subject:to:references:cc:from:message-id:date :user-agent:mime-version:in-reply-to:content-transfer-encoding; bh=6DANriwXsz0ixDAZsNuLYgL7jqaRG16/MnzOlkdwc3A=; b=s3bp1SWmlnw+lDEIfYijyB8rii4i6EOFiCPOJQSTkM08bGJLeP8zYIAFk4NqK3USv5 InXba/AdDs4hEX2zXUZCu+Q9mHXRnGeAYBsW09mXCXJlPV9/2zEXAAwCVDG96Y4yRmYc XuEdKrcYfQhXbvbB8ofMk0FuY8gkpW/5GgTyAkmcqUnU2rg4yjb0doS6KTTH1Sqj69Je w4UEG2z2hnu5yuQVrKasgNmMetqHzAv8g4Un6A778TNtJRroxOOU0cyP/7rnuYiHrERS TCuS/QAeN2BUyrFyAoTPy2Ag9hMLGjaAutQQNFSCyUiqMetkn+/mepQb1g4wIQiC2u2U wIgA== X-Gm-Message-State: AMke39mPioeHuB5pBnQw8hCi3jKPi63P0ay+fUhGotjdWESIXZDVYs1ef8G/Ih8gzeF1hw== X-Received: by 10.99.127.71 with SMTP id p7mr9475088pgn.125.1486718907357; Fri, 10 Feb 2017 01:28:27 -0800 (PST) Original-Received: from [192.168.0.18] (104.81.147.124.dy.bbexcite.jp. [124.147.81.104]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id u124sm3682526pgb.6.2017.02.10.01.28.25 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-RSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Fri, 10 Feb 2017 01:28:26 -0800 (PST) In-Reply-To: <83efz64ehp.fsf@gnu.org> X-BeenThere: debbugs-submit@debbugs.gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.18 Precedence: list X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 208.118.235.43 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" Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:129192 Archived-At: On 02/10/2017 05:49 PM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> From: Tino Calancha >> Date: Sun, 5 Feb 2017 02:54:03 +0900 (JST) >> cc: Tino Calancha , 25618@debbugs.gnu.org >> >> On Sat, 4 Feb 2017, Eli Zaretskii wrote: >> >>>> From: Tino Calancha >>>> Date: Sat, 04 Feb 2017 22:42:44 +0900 >>>> >>>> >>>> Prefer set a numeric limit of seconds than using the word 'few'. >>>> >>>> For instance, in my box the test `cl-seq-test-bug24264' in >>>> test/lisp/emacs-lisp/cl-seq-tests.el >>>> takes 7 s. >>>> With an explicit numeric threshold is easier to decide whether this test >>>> must be tagged as expensive or not. >>>> >>>> In following patch i define a few as 2-3 seconds. Other people might >>>> prefer 4-5 or even higher. >>>> Please, suggest a proper value to consider a test as expensive. >>> I think 2-3 sec is negligible, and 7 sec is not long enough to annoy. >>> 10 sec or more is beginning to sound like it comes close to "too >>> long", and 20 sec is definitely too long. >> Thank you. Now is clear. >> Are you OK with keep the sentence as it is now? >> I mean, keep: 'some few seconds'. > It's okay to leave it as is. I also don't object to saying something > more specific, but 2-3 sec sound just too few to me. Thanks. It's not a big thing. I will leave it as it is.