From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <zsh-workers-return-31837-mason-zsh=primenet.com.au@zsh.org>
Received: (qmail 10657 invoked by alias); 17 Oct 2013 14:28:52 -0000
Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
X-No-Archive: yes
List-Id: Zsh Workers List <zsh-workers.zsh.org>
List-Post: <mailto:zsh-workers@zsh.org>
List-Help: <mailto:zsh-workers-help@zsh.org>
X-Seq: 31837
Received: (qmail 25155 invoked from network); 17 Oct 2013 14:28:46 -0000
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.3.2 (2011-06-06) on f.primenet.com.au
X-Spam-Level: 
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI,
	SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2
X-AuditID: cbfec7f4-b7f0a6d000007b1b-17-525ff41bcfa7
Date: Thu, 17 Oct 2013 15:28:42 +0100
From: Peter Stephenson <p.stephenson@samsung.com>
To: Zsh Hackers' List <zsh-workers@zsh.org>
Subject: Re: Finer control over what gets written to the history file
Message-id: <20131017152842.062915c4@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
In-reply-to: <131017072022.ZM5433@torch.brasslantern.com>
References: <131015094100.ZM2399@torch.brasslantern.com>
 <20131015175838.19f0256d@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
 <131015173453.ZM2606@torch.brasslantern.com>
 <20131016095524.1340a535@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
 <20131016102008.69640804@pwslap01u.europe.root.pri>
 <131017072022.ZM5433@torch.brasslantern.com>
Organization: Samsung Cambridge Solution Centre
X-Mailer: Claws Mail 3.7.9 (GTK+ 2.22.0; i386-redhat-linux-gnu)
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit
X-Brightmail-Tracker:
 H4sIAAAAAAAAA+NgFupmluLIzCtJLcpLzFFi42I5/e/4NV3pL/FBBtOmilkcbH7I5MDoserg
	B6YAxigum5TUnMyy1CJ9uwSujNZD15gLGpgr/v9+z9TAuI2pi5GDQ0LARGLbUoUuRk4gU0zi
	wr31bF2MXBxCAksZJTqXvmYBSQgJLGeSeL/dDMRmEVCV6NyzjxXEZhMwlJi6aTYjyBwRAW2J
	9o9iIGFhAVeJczOnMYLYvAL2Ek8u3GQDsTkFLCVu/p/PBDF/B5PEw53NzCAJfgF9iat/PzFB
	HGEvMfPKGahmQYkfk++B3cAsoCWxeVsTK4QtL7F5zVvmCYwCs5CUzUJSNgtJ2QJG5lWMoqml
	yQXFSem5hnrFibnFpXnpesn5uZsYIQH4ZQfj4mNWhxgFOBiVeHhnLI8LEmJNLCuuzD3EKMHB
	rCTC63I/PkiINyWxsiq1KD++qDQntfgQIxMHp1QDo2bU5mXPw1YUXOxpYd570z7iT4DQUrMk
	N6EgLn3D/a68C0+a3t9sFsvjF/Ekx33ncYMP2+u4c81vvGb7qWSu3q7k+PW8uOVv12xTiW+p
	3x82f63aLBvmarg8PNvW+KaIvh1jcsT33j6/yWuWyH4ViT99oW3a5XrxLfxLSmKnVe3/KmJ0
	9NssJZbijERDLeai4kQAlm7Z+h4CAAA=

On Thu, 17 Oct 2013 07:20:22 -0700
Bart Schaefer <schaefer@brasslantern.com> wrote:
> OK, here's a final patch including doc.  Nobody commented on the memory
> management question and a push/pop heap is harmless if the heap is never
> used, so ...

I didn't investigate, but putting it around a significant chunk of I/O
activity like this seems pretty uncontroversial.

pws