Message-ID: <b8832ccca61b1d5a1e3dba6d087b3a5b.squirrel@www.webmail.wingert.org>
In-Reply-To: <20100605052429.GA4801@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
References: <20100605052429.GA4801@ednor.casa.cgf.cx>
Date: Sat, 5 Jun 2010 08:43:50 -0700
Subject: Re: Cygwin Performance and stat()
From: "Christopher Wingert" <mailbox@wingert.org>
To: cygwin@cygwin.com
User-Agent: SquirrelMail/1.4.20
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Mailing-List: contact cygwin-help@cygwin.com; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Sender: cygwin-owner@cygwin.com
Mail-Followup-To: cygwin@cygwin.com

> Can't really parse that sentence.

Then load your English parser.


> I haven't detected any "picking on" but then I can't claim to have
> written the fhandler* code anymore Corinna has rewritten most of it.  I
> do know that if you want to be taken seriously you really need to send a
> concrete suggestion/patch.

I don't know the right answer to the problem.

BUT... I have shown how to do achieve similar results to the dll, but with
significantly less overhead.

So... the person who cared to improve his/her/its code would say,  "Well
we use NTOpenFile() because it does the blah blah extra functionality that
FindNextFile()/GetFileAttributes() do not."  Then we could look to other
Win32 APIs to try to achieve those results.

For example opening a file on Windows for the purposes of stat()ing a file
is dumb, considering the way most Windows Virus Scanners work.


> So far, it seems to me that you're basically thinking out loud and
> expecting us to fill in the blanks.  That's not an effective way to
> getting anything changed.

Yes, thinking out loud is an effective way for a team to work together. 
You should try it....


--
Problem reports:       http://cygwin.com/problems.html
FAQ:                   http://cygwin.com/faq/
Documentation:         http://cygwin.com/docs.html
Unsubscribe info:      http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple