From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/20241
Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail
From: Hrvoje Niksic <hniksic@srce.hr>
Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general
Subject: Re: Pre-Processed maiil splitting under Gnus?
Date: 12 Jan 1999 17:38:21 +0100
Sender: owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu
Message-ID: <kigww2sh2f6.fsf@jagor.srce.hr>
References: <199901112208.RAA04940@magrathea.cosmic.com> <m3iuedcuua.fsf@peorth.gweep.net> <ub1zl0rkix.fsf@magrathea.cosmic.com> <vaflnj8xyww.fsf@ramses.cs.uni-dortmund.de>
NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035158567 16728 80.91.224.250 (21 Oct 2002 00:02:47 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org
NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 21 Oct 2002 00:02:47 +0000 (UTC)
Return-Path: <owner-ding@hpc.uh.edu>
Original-Received: from karazm.math.uh.edu (karazm.math.uh.edu [129.7.128.1])
	by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA01629
	for <jason@mailhost.sclp.com>; Tue, 12 Jan 1999 11:39:09 -0500 (EST)
Original-Received: from sina.hpc.uh.edu (lists@Sina.HPC.UH.EDU [129.7.3.5])
	by karazm.math.uh.edu (8.9.1/8.9.1) with ESMTP id KAB22996;
	Tue, 12 Jan 1999 10:38:43 -0600 (CST)
Original-Received: by sina.hpc.uh.edu (TLB v0.09a (1.20 tibbs 1996/10/09 22:03:07)); Tue, 12 Jan 1999 10:38:54 -0600 (CST)
Original-Received: from sclp3.sclp.com (root@sclp3.sclp.com [204.252.123.139]) by sina.hpc.uh.edu (8.7.3/8.7.3) with ESMTP id KAA14992 for <ding@hpc.uh.edu>; Tue, 12 Jan 1999 10:38:45 -0600 (CST)
Original-Received: from jagor.srce.hr (hniksic@jagor.srce.hr [161.53.2.130])
	by sclp3.sclp.com (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id LAA01612
	for <ding@gnus.org>; Tue, 12 Jan 1999 11:38:38 -0500 (EST)
Original-Received: (from hniksic@localhost)
	by jagor.srce.hr (8.9.0/8.9.0) id RAA20674;
	Tue, 12 Jan 1999 17:38:21 +0100 (MET)
Original-To: ding@gnus.org
X-Attribution: Hrvoje
X-Face: &{dT~)Pu6V<0y?>3p$;@vh\`C7xB~A0T-J%Og)J,@-1%q6Q+,
        gs<-9M#&`I8cJp2b1{vPE|~+JE+gx;a7%BG{}nY^ehK1"q#rG
        O,Rn1A_Cy%t]V=Brv7h<L@)<XGh#XroV6xQg$VA8K
In-Reply-To: Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE's message of "12 Jan 1999 17:02:07 +0100"
Original-Lines: 25
User-Agent: Gnus/5.070069 (Pterodactyl Gnus v0.69) XEmacs/21.2(beta5) (Aphrodite)
Precedence: list
X-Majordomo: 1.94.jlt7
Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:20241
X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:20241

Kai.Grossjohann@CS.Uni-Dortmund.DE writes:

> Asymptotically Approaching Relaxation <feoh@cosmic.com> writes:
> 
>   > I'm seeing a total performance turnaround once I re-wrote my .gnus
>   > file and minimized the length and complexity of the regexes I'm
>   > filtering on.
> 
> Ah.  Why didn't I think of this?  Since the Day of the
> Posixification of Regexes, regex matching has been rather slower for
> a number of regexes; and I'm not sure whether the fact that they're
> posixly correct now should be considered a Good Thing...

Strange.  Two remarks, though (none of which is meant to argue with
you):

1) As demonstrated by Tom Lord, GNU regex (which both Emacsen use) is
   still not POSIX.

2) Why are there, at least in XEmacs, two sets of functions, posix-
   regexp functions, and "normal" regexp functions?  Also, the
   internal code has various posix-p flags that apparently specify
   whether POSIX behaviour is desired.  I though the reason for
   duplicate functionality was to gain speed in the non-POSIX (the
   more usual) case.