From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 19083 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2000 11:41:26 -0000 Received: from sunsite.auc.dk (130.225.51.30) by ns1.primenet.com.au with SMTP; 7 Sep 2000 11:41:26 -0000 Received: (qmail 8331 invoked by alias); 7 Sep 2000 11:41:07 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@sunsite.auc.dk; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes X-Seq: 12771 Received: (qmail 8324 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2000 11:41:06 -0000 Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2000 13:41:04 +0200 (MET DST) Message-Id: <200009071141.NAA01988@beta.informatik.hu-berlin.de> From: Sven Wischnowsky To: zsh-workers@sunsite.auc.dk In-reply-to: "Andrej Borsenkow"'s message of Thu, 7 Sep 2000 15:26:21 +0400 Subject: Re: Is this statement correct? Andrej Borsenkow wrote: > This from new section, User contribution/Utilities: > > ==== > Recompiling Functions > --------------------- > > If you frequently edit your zsh functions, or periodically update your > zsh installation to track the latest developments, you may find that > function digests compiled with the zcompile builtin are frequently out > of date with respect to the function source files. This is not usually > a problem, because zsh always looks for the newest file when loading a > function, but it may cause slower shell startup and function loading. > ==== > > I remember, that Sven explicitly stated that digest files are *not* checked > against there source functions to save execution time (individual files are). > I do not have articele number handy. I vaguely remember having said something about this or something similar but having been confused at that time (I don't remember when that was either and can't offer a message number). However: yes, it is true. The code *does* compare the times for digest files, individual zwc files and the original file (if they can be found). See the function try_dump_file() in parse.c. Bye Sven -- Sven Wischnowsky wischnow@informatik.hu-berlin.de