From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: =?utf-8?Q?Sebasti=C3=A1n_Mon=C3=ADa?= Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [PATCH] EWW - use revert--buffer-function to reload, and allow reload in eww-list-buffer Date: Mon, 14 Oct 2024 22:39:50 -0400 Message-ID: <87jzeagkcp.fsf@sebasmonia.com> References: <86y12tycdy.fsf@gnu.org> <87v7xvh4rd.fsf@sebasmonia.com> <63628e6e-9365-40da-bb20-2e5be99c71b4@alphapapa.net> <87o73ngwfk.fsf@sebasmonia.com> <3cff8953-ad69-43ef-b1ab-90d80e9d5f5f@alphapapa.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="1230"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , jporterbugs@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Adam Porter Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Tue Oct 15 04:41:07 2024 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1t0XUd-0000AK-CS for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Tue, 15 Oct 2024 04:41:03 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t0XTa-0000pP-7f; Mon, 14 Oct 2024 22:39:58 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t0XTY-0000pD-B4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 14 Oct 2024 22:39:56 -0400 Original-Received: from fhigh-a1-smtp.messagingengine.com ([103.168.172.152]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1t0XTW-0002DE-KQ; Mon, 14 Oct 2024 22:39:56 -0400 Original-Received: from phl-compute-12.internal (phl-compute-12.phl.internal [10.202.2.52]) by mailfhigh.phl.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 948FC114022D; Mon, 14 Oct 2024 22:39:51 -0400 (EDT) Original-Received: from phl-mailfrontend-01 ([10.202.2.162]) by phl-compute-12.internal (MEProxy); Mon, 14 Oct 2024 22:39:51 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=sebasmonia.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date:from:from :in-reply-to:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :reply-to:subject:subject:to:to; s=fm2; t=1728959991; x= 1729046391; bh=eb9G+Hiltmnu91Eg1qHn4xmpA/OxqxJKUniWiakpry4=; b=T NJ0e9ixJB4WaEdFJM404hgO47hVEaDNa+P+QhBODUL1TV7Z/wrSiFn3NzcLG3kPV Lisa0hlfgtCu7LYRmIPTh4/jAN8j5KjETT2Wqdg7NsGPtpVTCwwbH05giJIGavcL qaawUf73Q0GeYoQ97I1oxdSwBMk6BlNJTwMvg/hWzFT2+t7j0c/nUDql+aBO7v1k yzg2cgd2do9qjEqgC73Z8OpDPqt0Ow/vtoGl0JKIwtskNllatWD+h4TB8ewVgXbg g3Celjk8/dZtvM8kmRp/59mNPmMPquaakcQkF/LL7yvrf6QlsPDz3GkyKCeFzw9e wJVp5mcfvHyXLCGzvujXw== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:cc:content-type:content-type:date:date :feedback-id:feedback-id:from:from:in-reply-to:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:reply-to:subject:subject:to :to:x-me-proxy:x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s= fm2; t=1728959991; x=1729046391; bh=eb9G+Hiltmnu91Eg1qHn4xmpA/Ox qxJKUniWiakpry4=; b=B0UDIk7NUW2B6qZf33h84S2R/nBIQfu2uLEwNoUp+fo9 AJtr/Oy/St4H5h25avyBCdr2y2miEGgI6MlVFQRfock5h2f2JbzpLU0kHkTE3HKm GTi447sYNepznxzJuhGO9StsdZKZiReKHu0z8yJh9iIg7WbkuY5urDBf0zRkjxu/ j/6qQeTxetHccbi+movsa0QUEaPUSwbN2ATOUEAUtBY5MtMv7TGoVwMuj7DQg93U qXrd4Waxs3pW0pcsRA8i03X6mKUfoee8mzrOVxk30J6+Kk2nP1DCebp+xkXtTyxW EXSPoVSydsnZVXYQlNmJB+67gx3+Fe7b5npUwCo17A== X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgeeftddrvdegiedgiedvucetufdoteggodetrfdotf fvucfrrhhofhhilhgvmecuhfgrshhtofgrihhlpdggtfgfnhhsuhgsshgtrhhisggvpdfu rfetoffkrfgpnffqhgenuceurghilhhouhhtmecufedttdenucesvcftvggtihhpihgvnh htshculddquddttddmnecujfgurhephffvvefujghffffkfgggtgesthdtredttderjeen ucfhrhhomhepufgvsggrshhtihojnhcuofhonhovrgcuoehsvggsrghsthhirghnsehsvg gsrghsmhhonhhirgdrtghomheqnecuggftrfgrthhtvghrnhepgfefheevkedvledvueev gfegvdejfedtgeehgffgkeejgeeufeduleejveefuedtnecuvehluhhsthgvrhfuihiivg eptdenucfrrghrrghmpehmrghilhhfrhhomhepshgvsggrshhtihgrnhesshgvsggrshhm ohhnihgrrdgtohhmpdhnsggprhgtphhtthhopeegpdhmohguvgepshhmthhpohhuthdprh gtphhtthhopegvmhgrtghsqdguvghvvghlsehgnhhurdhorhhgpdhrtghpthhtohepjhhp ohhrthgvrhgsuhhgshesghhmrghilhdrtghomhdprhgtphhtthhopegvlhhiiiesghhnuh drohhrghdprhgtphhtthhopegruggrmhesrghlphhhrghprghprgdrnhgvth X-ME-Proxy: Feedback-ID: iab2c46da:Fastmail Original-Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Mon, 14 Oct 2024 22:39:50 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <3cff8953-ad69-43ef-b1ab-90d80e9d5f5f@alphapapa.net> (Adam Porter's message of "Mon, 14 Oct 2024 19:08:03 -0500") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=103.168.172.152; envelope-from=sebastian@sebasmonia.com; helo=fhigh-a1-smtp.messagingengine.com X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_CERTIFIED_BLOCKED=0.001, RCVD_IN_VALIDITY_RPBL_BLOCKED=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 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-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:324580 Archived-At: Adam Porter writes: >> These sound a bit like micro-optimizations, how many eww buffers can >> one >> person have open that these speed differences would matter? > > I'm sure that the difference would not be noticeable. But when > committing new code, why not choose the most efficient implementation, > when the size and complexity of the source code is equivalent? Over > 30 or 40 years, little things add up. And I was wrong, the difference doesn't depend only on the number of eww buffers. The older version of eww-buffer-list' also used with-current-buffer and it checked _all live buffers_. That's potentially a lot more than only eww buffers. Thank you! Seb