RE: testing for a remote file to include file on a Windows mapped drive

[Drew Adams]

> > I would prefer a function which returns "fast" or "slow".
> 
> We have that.  It's called `file-remote-p':
> 
>    A file is considered "remote" if accessing it is likely to 
>    be slower or less reliable than accessing local files.
> 
> Admittedly, the current implementation is not always good enough.
> 
> > One could consider additional regexps, which tell "when the mount
> > point matches this regexp, return `t' for file-mounted-p", and the
> > contrary case with the other regexp.  But this would make 
> > the handling more complex.
> 
> That's what ffap-rfs-regexp tries to do.  And yes, I think it 
> should be added to file-remote-p.

It sounds like we violently agree. Perhaps even all of us. 

At least I, for one, don't care where the test is or what we call it. I just
want a test like `file-remote-p' that is a little bit more savvy.