[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Reducing the sit-for time in w3m-process-wait-process


せっかく ChangeLog も書いていただきましたし、とりあえず commit してみま

;; うちでは問題はなさそうです。

David Engster <deng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

> Katsumi Yamaoka <yamaoka@xxxxxxx> writes:
>>>>>>> In [emacs-w3m : No.10494] David Engster wrote:
>>> David Engster <deng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:
>>>> I'm using the encapsulate-images feature from the shimbun package, and I
>>>> noticed that when an article contains many images, it takes pretty long
>>>> for w3m to fetch them. It seems to me this time is almost entirely spend
>>>> on the '(sit-for 1)' in w3m-process-wait-process, while the actual w3m
>>>> process is already finished. When I change this to '(sit-for 0.1)',
>>>> fetching the images is much faster. It also seems to me that this speeds
>>>> up refreshing shimbun groups in general.
>>> To followup on this: I sometimes got parsing errors with '(sit-for
>>> 0.1)', because the buffer didn't contain the whole output from the w3m
>>> binary. However, I could fix this by using accept-process-output in the
>>> w3m sentinel. Now everything works without problems, and the reduced
>>> sit-for time makes working with emacs-w3m faster. Before, a w3m call
>>> would at least take one second, even when w3m just received a redirect
>>> or was fetching a small picture for a shimbun article. I attached the
>>> two-lines patch to this mail.
>> Great!  I verified that the patch makes shimbun fast beyond
>> recognition for fetching articles containing many images.  David,
>> could you provide the ChangeLog entry?
> 2008-12-05  David Engster  <dengste@xxxxxx>
>         * w3m-proc.el (w3m-process-wait-process): Reduce sit-for time.
>         (w3m-process-sentinel): Wait for process output (on Emacs only).
>> I'm not sure how to solve it but I'd like to install the patch very
>> much :) since I usually use Emacs, not XEmacs.  Any idea?  If no one
>> comments, I'll install it in the emacs-w3m CVS trunk with the
>> modification as follows:
> Looks good to me, but TSUCHIYA Masatoshi's concerns are certainly
> reasonable. I don't know how to really handle this, either.