Re: Why doesn't Info `T' cache node tree for current file?

[Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org>]

> From: "Drew Adams" <drew.adams@oracle.com>
> Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2008 09:59:56 -0700
> 
> I understand that the TOC built depends on the current Info file, but I'm
> wondering why the node list (tree) for a given Info file isn't kept around, to
> avoid rebuilding it each time a user hits `T'.

AFAIK, Info doesn't maintain the node structure (it doesn't need to be
a tree, btw, it could be a graph) in memory at all.  It doesn't need
to, except for Info-toc.  So if you are suggesting that the results of
Info-toc should be stashed away waiting for the user to invoke
Info-toc again for the same Info file, then maybe we should do it;
otherwise, generating the node graph just so TOC would be created
faster is IMO not a good idea.

Btw, I can understand why whoever wrote Info-toc didn't save the
resulting buffer: Info always throws away the (sub-)file when it
switches to another, and *toc* is treated the same way.  So it fits
better into the overall code structure, whereby a file is visited (in
this case, generated out of thin air), displayed, then its buffer
discarded.