- From: Terje Bless <link@pobox.com>
- Date: Wed, 30 Jul 2003 12:18:26 +0200
- To: QA Dev <public-qa-dev@w3.org>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Ville Skyttä <ville.skytta@iki.fi> wrote: >>What about the Config::General/265kB verbosemsg.cfg issue? I can have >>a go at using Storable to persist/use the parsed file if it 1) doesn't >>exist or 2) is older than verbosemsg.cfg if you think it's a good idea. > >On a second thought, it would be better if Config::General could do this >transparently. Well, I must admit I'm somewhat ambivalent on this issue. As you demonstrated there is quite a bit of overhead associated with the current implementation, but the question is whether it is significant in the context (e.g. "check" is pretty resource intensive as it is). Adding Storable would add complexity and an additional point of failure that needs to be traded off against the performance gain. I'm not certain which way the needle should/would tip in this case (meaning that anyone with strong opinions in either direction are invited to make that decision!). But implementing this as a new feature for Config:General instead of as a local modification does make sense if upstream will take such a patch. - -- I have to admit that I'm hoping the current situation with regard to XML Namespaces and W3C XML Schemas is a giant practical joke, but I see no signs of pranksters coming forward with a gleeful smile to announce that they were just kidding. -- Simon St.Laurent -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGP SDK 3.0.2 iQA/AwUBPyebcaPyPrIkdfXsEQINQgCg8WQl/FPklBTJQjlTn4D6GhxIx3MAoI6+ yTP5VnKwN45lSvouWH1yL2ww =cbVE -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
Received on Wednesday, 30 July 2003 06:18:37 UTC