From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: testing for a remote file to include file on a Windows mapped drive Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 03:34:44 -0400 Message-ID: References: <87bq781bf7.fsf@gmx.de> <000a01c8a314$5fff7630$0200a8c0@us.oracle.com> <000d01c8a324$97820590$0200a8c0@us.oracle.com> <000f01c8a334$b2a40660$0200a8c0@us.oracle.com> <000101c8a37f$eeb543d0$0200a8c0@us.oracle.com> <004101c8aa8a$c479e230$0200a8c0@us.oracle.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1209540907 24387 80.91.229.12 (30 Apr 2008 07:35:07 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Wed, 30 Apr 2008 07:35:07 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 'Eli Zaretskii' , jasonr@gnu.org, michael.albinus@gmx.de, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Drew Adams" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Wed Apr 30 09:35:43 2008 connect(): Connection refused Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1Jr6qs-0003hg-JU for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 30 Apr 2008 09:35:42 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:40114 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Jr6qB-0006Px-DG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Wed, 30 Apr 2008 03:34:59 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Jr6q8-0006Ps-8R for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Apr 2008 03:34:56 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Jr6q5-0006Pf-WC for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Apr 2008 03:34:55 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=40731 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Jr6q5-0006Pc-Qn for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Wed, 30 Apr 2008 03:34:53 -0400 Original-Received: from mx20.gnu.org ([199.232.41.8]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Jr6py-0006ya-2s; Wed, 30 Apr 2008 03:34:46 -0400 Original-Received: from ironport2-out.pppoe.ca ([206.248.154.182] helo=ironport2-out.teksavvy.com) by mx20.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Jr6px-0002ge-BQ; Wed, 30 Apr 2008 03:34:45 -0400 X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: AoQCAD++F0jO+JghdGdsb2JhbACBU49+ASebEQ X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="4.25,727,1199682000"; d="scan'208";a="19666477" Original-Received: from smtp.pppoe.ca (HELO smtp.teksavvy.com) ([65.39.196.238]) by ironport2-out.teksavvy.com with ESMTP; 30 Apr 2008 03:34:44 -0400 Original-Received: from pastel.home ([206.248.152.33]) by smtp.teksavvy.com (Internet Mail Server v1.0) with ESMTP id KLM89844; Wed, 30 Apr 2008 03:34:44 -0400 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 90D5081E8; Wed, 30 Apr 2008 03:34:44 -0400 (EDT) In-Reply-To: <004101c8aa8a$c479e230$0200a8c0@us.oracle.com> (Drew Adams's message of "Tue, 29 Apr 2008 23:23:54 -0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/23.0.60 (gnu/linux) X-detected-kernel: by mx20.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 4) X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:96203 Archived-At: > `file-remote-p' is also slower than it could be, at least for some > file names. For file names that `ffap-file-remote-p' determines are > remote, calling it is faster - Michael found it to be about 70 times > faster than `file-remote-p'. I suggested incorporating the ffap test > into `file-remote-p'. I won't worry about the performance of file-remote-p until someone can show me a real case where it matters. This is also true of pretty much anything else than `file-remote-p'. It's called "don't do premature optimizations" and there's a good reason for it: you need the concrete case in order to know for what to optimize. Stefan