Helge Hafting wrote:
rgheck wrote:
Vincent van Ravesteijn - TNW wrote:
Maybe it's already clear,
Yes, I understand now.
How do we solve it then ?
Do we need a new class that we use internally. In this class we store a
filename, which is case-sensitive on case-sensitive filesystem, that is
guaranteed to be a long filename and not a short one (on Windows), that
is not a symlink, that is relative or absolute (pick one or both).
This could work, though it looks as if we're duplicating what
QFileInfo does, and we might run into similar problems about caching
to what we had before. I don't know---but I think this makes some
sense out of why they want to return false if the files don't exist.
The problem, as I see it, is that QFileInfo objects are getting
created so often, which requires filesystem access, even
independently of the caching stuff. And I'm not sure how that can be
avoided.
Anyway, here's another idea. Why are we calling loadIfNeeded() every
time? It's there that the check is made that the file is loaded in a
buffer, which (if I'm remembering right) calls == to see. It seems to
me that there are only a few occasions when a file could need to be
loaded if it wasn't before. E.g., if an InsetInclude has been added
or modified; or if the default master has been changed. So maybe we
could have some flag, maybe in the BufferList, that meant: you don't
need to check this, nothing has changed. And it could be set and
cleared by e.g. InsetInclude constructors.
Wouldn't it be better to remove the check completely? Instead of
checking if we need to call "loadIfNeeded" all the time - don't.
Instead, check (and loasd) only when an insetinclude is changed/modified.
That way, the test don't merely get cheaper, the test goes away which
is even better.
That's roughly my idea, but there are other things that could happen, I
think. A child, or master, could be closed for some reason; the master
could be saved under a new name; and so forth. So there are two options:
(i) Call loadIfNeeded() on all those occasions; (ii) Set a flag on those
occasions, which can be checked at the beginning of loadIfNeeded(), and
then the check is skipped if it's not set. I prefer (ii) only because I
can well imagine other reasons to want to check this flag. (The flag
would mean something like: The loaded buffers and/or master-child
relationships have been altered.)
Richard
