Hi Bastien, At Tue, 19 Jul 2011 01:06:14 +0200, Bastien wrote: > : > > I'm sure that the caching mechanism is useful, but I'm not sure that > > we should do it with paying the large cost of rewrite whole codes. > > FWIW, this is a two separate steps process: 1) write a usable cache, > then 2) re-implement (parts of) the agenda by using it. > > I think (1) could be interesting /per-se/ and if it helps calfw, then > it's even more interesting.
What does '/per-se/' mean ? Excuse me for asking a trivial word. I'm also think about cache in the calfw side, such as an alist: (date . [a list of contents]). Then, uses can refresh the cache explicitly. It is easy to implement. Is the plan(1) the same idea? Regards, -- SAKURAI, Masashi (family, given) m.saku...@kiwanami.net
