Re: autoreverting remote files

[Stefan Monnier]

>>> Sure. But `file-remote-p' does not know the difference.
>> Not true: file-remote-p delegates the job to Tramp, and Tramp does know.
> We've discussed it a year ago. file-remote-p is also used for
> implementation dependent decisions; what we need is something like
> "file-access-is-slow-p",

AFAIC, file-remote-p is exactly what you call "file-access-is-slow-p".

> which could also be true even for "local" files, if they are mounted,

They're all "mounted", so I guess you mean "mounted from a remote
server", in which case file-remote-p should indeed return non-nil (tho
this is not implemented yet).

> or because they are extremely HUGE.

This seems to be out of the scope of file-remote-p (or
file-access-is-slow-p), and is already well served by file-attributes,
I believe.

> Anyway, this is another discussion. I wanted to know whether I could
> change autorevert.el; I haven't seen objections until now :-)

It looks like a fine idea, yes.

BTW, I don't understand why file-remote-p is checked in
auto-revert-handler rather than in (global-)auto-revert-(tail-)mode.
It's not like the remoteness of a buffer is going to change, is it?
It would also make it possible for the user to force auto-revert-mode in
some specific buffer even if the file is remote.


        Stefan