From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: "Richard M. Stallman" Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.bugs Subject: bug#122: 23.0.60; Slowdown in directory scanning over time. Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 14:26:02 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87r68bwgu9.fsf@cyd.mit.edu> Reply-To: rms@gnu.org, 122@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15 X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1221504495 2964 80.91.229.12 (15 Sep 2008 18:48:15 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 18:48:15 +0000 (UTC) To: Kenichi Handa , 122@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com Original-X-From: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Sep 15 20:49:11 2008 Return-path: Envelope-to: geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1KfJ8D-0006sx-8t for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 15 Sep 2008 20:49:05 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:49112 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KfJ7C-0008Pw-AG for geb-bug-gnu-emacs@m.gmane.org; Mon, 15 Sep 2008 14:48:02 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KfJ76-0008Pe-PF for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Sep 2008 14:47:56 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1KfJ75-0008P4-6t for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Sep 2008 14:47:56 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=59099 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1KfJ74-0008Ov-Tx for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Sep 2008 14:47:54 -0400 Original-Received: from rzlab.ucr.edu ([138.23.92.77]:50134) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1KfJ72-0001SZ-Nr for bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org; Mon, 15 Sep 2008 14:47:54 -0400 Original-Received: from rzlab.ucr.edu (rzlab.ucr.edu [127.0.0.1]) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id m8FIlYRs018534; Mon, 15 Sep 2008 11:47:35 -0700 Original-Received: (from debbugs@localhost) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Submit) id m8FIZ5NF013754; Mon, 15 Sep 2008 11:35:05 -0700 X-Loop: don@donarmstrong.com Resent-From: "Richard M. Stallman" Resent-To: bug-submit-list@donarmstrong.com Resent-CC: Emacs Bugs Resent-Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 18:35:05 +0000 Resent-Message-ID: Resent-Sender: don@donarmstrong.com X-Emacs-PR-Message: report 122 X-Emacs-PR-Package: emacs X-Emacs-PR-Keywords: Original-Received: via spool by 122-submit@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com id=B122.122150328011575 (code B ref 122); Mon, 15 Sep 2008 18:35:05 +0000 Original-Received: (at 122) by emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com; 15 Sep 2008 18:28:00 +0000 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org (fencepost.gnu.org [140.186.70.10]) by rzlab.ucr.edu (8.13.8/8.13.8/Debian-3) with ESMTP id m8FIRvpB011569 for <122@emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com>; Mon, 15 Sep 2008 11:27:58 -0700 Original-Received: from rms by fencepost.gnu.org with local (Exim 4.67) (envelope-from ) id 1KfIlu-00027F-0p; Mon, 15 Sep 2008 14:26:02 -0400 In-reply-to: (message from Kenichi Handa on Mon, 15 Sep 2008 10:04:25 +0900) X-detected-operating-system: by monty-python.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) Resent-Date: Mon, 15 Sep 2008 14:47:56 -0400 X-BeenThere: bug-gnu-emacs@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Bug reports for GNU Emacs, the Swiss army knife of text editors" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: bug-gnu-emacs-bounces+geb-bug-gnu-emacs=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.bugs:20554 Archived-At: (1) A coding system can have pre-write-conversion function, and that function can call code-conversion function recursively. I read in the doc string of define-coding-system that the pre-write-conversion function is called before doing the ordinary work of encoding. Is it possible to call the pre-write-conversion function before obtaining the work buffer? That way, there would never be recursive encoding. (2) If REPLACE arg is non-nil in insert-file-contents and a file need a decoding, we call decode_coding_c_string while a work buffer is in use. I see why decoding is needed in this case, but why is a work buffer already in use? It seems to me that there is only one act of decoding to be done in that call to insert-file-contents.