Re: [Nmh-workers] new command lacks lock

[Ken Hornstein]

>>>Even on local disk, I expect it makes a noticeable difference. Right
>>>now it takes 0.009s to run, with 940,047 files in 282 directories,
>>>11,994 unread total.
>>
>> Ok, but it sounds like you're not scanning all of those directories, right?
>
>Sorry, I don't understand the question. As currently implemented, new
>does not scan these directories, it only opens sequence files. I
>thought you were proposing changing that.

I meant that out of your 282 directories, you're not checking them all for
new messages every time you run "new", are you?  It sounded like you were
checking a subset of them.

>It offends me aesthetically though: that's a ton of wasted work.
>Reading the directories is completely unnecessary.

Understood, and I think you've convinced me.  I was just unhappy about
the duplicated code to read sequence files.  But I see the problem; the
sequence functions want to take a struct msgs argument, and we can't
really construct THAT without doing a readdir().  Well, I suppose we
could fake one up, but that really sounds like the wrong solution.
Let me meditate on this a bit.  The solutions that jump out at me are
either create a callback for seq_read() and allow it to take a NULL
for the struct msgs pointer, or just live with the code duplication.

--Ken