From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Msuck: nntp://news.gmane.io/gmane.emacs.gnus.general/6371 Path: main.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.gnus.general Subject: Re: performance of fuzzy subject handling and killing threads Date: 24 May 1996 17:41:51 +0200 Message-ID: References: <9605241024.AA24364@cujo.cygnus.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: coloc-standby.netfonds.no X-Trace: main.gmane.org 1035146836 3409 80.91.224.250 (20 Oct 2002 20:47:16 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@main.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 20 Oct 2002 20:47:16 +0000 (UTC) Return-Path: ding-request@ifi.uio.no Original-Received: from ifi.uio.no (ifi.uio.no [129.240.64.2]) by deanna.miranova.com (8.7.5/8.6.9) with SMTP id JAA09108 for ; Fri, 24 May 1996 09:58:34 -0700 Original-Received: from aegir.ifi.uio.no (4867@aegir.ifi.uio.no [129.240.94.24]) by ifi.uio.no with ESMTP (8.6.11/ifi2.4) id for ; Fri, 24 May 1996 18:17:16 +0200 Original-Received: (from larsi@localhost) by aegir.ifi.uio.no ; Fri, 24 May 1996 18:17:14 +0200 Original-To: ding@ifi.uio.no In-Reply-To: Ken Raeburn's message of Fri, 24 May 1996 06:24:51 -0400 Original-Lines: 24 X-Mailer: September Gnus v0.94/Emacs 19.29 Xref: main.gmane.org gmane.emacs.gnus.general:6371 X-Report-Spam: http://spam.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.gnus.general:6371 Ken Raeburn writes: > Since the simplified strings come out the same each time they're > generated, I figured, why not cache them? It'll slow down the first > pass through the article list a little, but following passes should be > much faster. And in newsgroups with lots of unread articles -- enough > for the additional cost of building the cache to be noticeable -- I'm > guessing it's probably not the most common case that 'k' gets used > exactly once. Yes, I never use `k' myself. (Well, I just use `M-C-l' to kill articles; what with the threading and gathering, it kills exactly the same articles that `k' does in a fraction of the time.) > And while I'm at it, why not intern them in a group-local obarray? > That way emacs itself would automatically keep them unique, so > comparisons would be even cheaper, and the extra storage required > would be reduced somewhat in most cases. Nice technique. I'll be adding your stuff to Red Gnus. -- "Yes. The journey through the human heart would have to wait until some other time."