wanderlust imap implantation seems to be much faster

wanderlust imap implantation seems to be much faster

[Uwe Brauer]

Hello

Unfortunately under Xemacs (ngnus 0.11) the imap backend is slow
(compared to say thunderbird). I tried for a file to use  offlineimap
but it did not convince me neither.

Since some days I gave wanderlust a try and I must say the imap backend
is much faster.

Is there any possibility to port that code into gnus?

thanks

Uwe Brauer 

Re: wanderlust imap implantation seems to be much faster

[Tassilo Horn]

Uwe Brauer <oub@mat.ucm.es> writes:

Hi Uwe,

> Unfortunately under Xemacs (ngnus 0.11) the imap backend is slow
> (compared to say thunderbird). I tried for a file to use offlineimap
> but it did not convince me neither.

What exactly didn't convince you?  At least for me it works just
brilliant with a local dovecot imap server.  (Offlineimapping to a
maildir folder isn't that good, cause nnmaildir is very slow for huge
folders.)

> Since some days I gave wanderlust a try and I must say the imap
> backend is much faster.

Is the transfer of articles really much faster, or just the
display/thread building?  I don't think the former can be done much
faster in elisp.  One thing I can imagine is that WL uses some
sophisticated caching like the agent does in Gnus (which we all know is
not very applicable to nnimap).

> Is there any possibility to port that code into gnus?

Not if you won't do it yourself. ;-)

Bye,
Tassilo
-- 
A child of five could understand this! Fetch me a child of five!