From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Michael Albinus Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: testing for a remote file to include file on a Windows mapped drive Date: Mon, 05 May 2008 17:57:21 +0200 Message-ID: References: <87bq781bf7.fsf@gmx.de> <000d01c8a324$97820590$0200a8c0@us.oracle.com> <000f01c8a334$b2a40660$0200a8c0@us.oracle.com> <000101c8a37f$eeb543d0$0200a8c0@us.oracle.com> <004101c8aa8a$c479e230$0200a8c0@us.oracle.com> <004b01c8aaca$2783bd80$0200a8c0@us.oracle.com> <000f01c8aec7$5288ef90$c2b22382@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 1210002992 8130 80.91.229.12 (5 May 2008 15:56:32 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 5 May 2008 15:56:32 +0000 (UTC) Cc: 'Eli Zaretskii' , jasonr@gnu.org, 'Stefan Monnier' , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: "Drew Adams" Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon May 05 17:57:09 2008 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 1Jt33p-0006vQ-Pk for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 05 May 2008 17:57:06 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1]:41442 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Jt338-0004Ux-4s for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 05 May 2008 11:56:22 -0400 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Jt333-0004TA-LB for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 05 May 2008 11:56:17 -0400 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1Jt331-0004Sy-8T for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 05 May 2008 11:56:16 -0400 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (port=33476 helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1Jt331-0004Sv-38 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 05 May 2008 11:56:15 -0400 Original-Received: from mailrelay2.alcatel.de ([194.113.59.96]) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1Jt32r-0006Jl-NB; Mon, 05 May 2008 11:56:06 -0400 Original-Received: from slbhab.alcatel.de (slbhab.bln.sel.alcatel.de [149.204.63.218]) by mailrelay2.alcatel.de (8.13.8/8.13.8/ICT) with ESMTP id m45Fu2So020571; Mon, 5 May 2008 17:56:03 +0200 In-Reply-To: <000f01c8aec7$5288ef90$c2b22382@us.oracle.com> (Drew Adams's message of "Mon, 5 May 2008 08:47:27 -0700") User-Agent: Gnus/5.1008 (Gnus v5.10.8) Emacs/21.3 (hpux) X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.57 on 149.204.45.73 X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: Linux 2.6, seldom 2.4 (older, 2) 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:96505 Archived-At: "Drew Adams" writes: >> > I offered to describe my use case, but it won't prove >> > anything special in this regard. Suffice it to say that >> > I would like the test to be about as quick as >> > `ffap-rfs-regexp' for the regexps that `ffap-rfs-regexp' handles. >> >> The test via `file-remote-p' is slower than via `ffap-file-remote-p'. >> In my profiling, it was 0.0007140419 sec vs 0.00001117 sec for one >> call. A factor of 64, yes, but does it really count? > > Yes, for my case it does. Oops, maybe there is a misunderstanding? (Forgive me my bad English) I meant the time a call of `file-remote-p' needs to run. I don't comment *why* you need such a test. Even if you have a function which calls 100x `file-remote-p', this would last 0.07140419 sec only. Does it really count? Best regards, Michael.