From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/9374
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: "William M. Perry" <wmperry@aventail.com>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general
Subject: Re: slow splitting
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 1997 08:38:26 -0800
Message-ID: <199701101638.IAA13590@newman>
References: <w0oheymops.fsf@rupert.oscs.montana.edu>
	<yviazpyi2nhl.fsf@atreides.mindspring.com>
Reply-To: wmperry@aventail.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035149412 18118 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 21:30:12 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 21:30:12 +0000 (UTC)
Cc: The Ding List <ding@ifi.uio.no>
Return-Path: <ding-request@ifi.uio.no>
Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (0@ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2])
          by deanna.miranova.com (8.8.4/8.8.4) with SMTP
	  id JAA10249 for <steve@miranova.com>; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 09:04:49 -0800
Original-Received: from newman (root@newman.aventail.com [38.225.141.10]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) 
	id <RAA27898@ifi.uio.no> for <ding@ifi.uio.no> ; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 17:39:52 +0100
Original-Received: from kramer.in.aventail.com.aventail.com (wmperry@kramer [192.168.1.12]) by newman (8.6.12/8.6.9) with SMTP id IAA13590; Fri, 10 Jan 1997 08:38:26 -0800
Original-To: Sudish Joseph <sudish@mindspring.com>
In-Reply-To: <yviazpyi2nhl.fsf@atreides.mindspring.com>
Errors-to: wmperry@aventail.com
X-Face: O~Rn;(l][/-o1sALg4A@xpE:9-"'IR[%;,,!m7</SYF`{vYQ(&RI1&EiH[FvT;J}@f!4kfz
 x_!Y#=y{Uuj9GvUi=cPuajQ(Z42R[wE@{G,sn$qGr5g/wnb*"*ktI+,CD}1Z'wxrM2ag-r0p5I6\nA
 [WJopW_J.WY;
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:9374
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:9374

Sudish Joseph writes:
>Chris Jones writes:
>> Should I turn these hook expressions into full-fledged patches, and
>> send them in?  The reason I'm asking is this:  If you're running on a
>> really fast box (and you have simple splitting rules, which I don't),
>> those messages could just whiz by you, potentially causing some worry
>> because the thing's printing messages that you don't get an
>> opportunity to read.
>
>The jwz-enhanced GNUS that was standard with XEmacs until 19.13(12?)
>had a messaging function that tried not to call 'message if messages
>occured too close to each other.  I do not recollect if it was based
>on time or print-nth-message, but you might look it up if you have 
>access to that version of GNUS.

  There is a similar function in the url package that will only do it every
'n' seconds.

-bill