Re: icefox tests issues

On Friday 22 of October 2004 04:00, Raul Fernandes wrote:
> >That's slightly more than 20% time saved in the best case, and it is for
> > code only executing empty loops. Adding some useful code into the body
> > loops would reduce the improvement, and KDE applications also don't spend
> > all the time just iterating over lists. In reality the gain could
> > possibly be even negligibly small.
> >That said, I don't see any good reason against, so if you're willing to do
> >this tedious work and do the changes in KDE, why not?
>
> In a directory with >2000 files to interate over, adding a UDSEntry for
> every file to interate over, we could have a small improvement, maybe not
> so negligibly small. Improving all loops like this, we can get a speedup.
>
> >That should be sufficient. You could also probably get a CVS account to do
> >your changes yourself if you're willing to work more on this.
>
> Well, I took this as a Junior Job, really. This type of "bugfix" makes a
> newbie (like me) be more familiar with the code to make more deeper changes
> in the future. How can I get a CVS account and start the work?? Or only
> send patches here??

 http://developer.kde.org/documentation/tutorials/howto/developer-howto.html#cvsaccount
 http://kde.org/jobs/

 In case you don't qualify yet, just send the patches here.

-- 
Lubos Lunak
KDE developer
---------------------------------------------------------------------
SuSE CR, s.r.o.  e-mail: [email protected] , [email protected]
Drahobejlova 27  tel: +420 2 9654 2373
190 00 Praha 9   fax: +420 2 9654 2374
Czech Republic   http://www.suse.cz/