> Whenever <<loadTiddlers>> is processed, the entire remote file is read- > in and it's tiddlers are compared with the tiddlers in the current > document. As such, nearly all of the processing overhead occurs *each > and every time* the macro is invoked, regardless of whether or not the > tiddlers in the current document are 'up-to-date'. Thus, auto-saving > after updating will *not* result in any significant speed enhancement > for subsequent users of that document. It does have an impact when you're forced to use the very slow IE6 as if there are changes to be loaded IE6 tends to give a 'slow script' warning which isn't very user-friendly.
> In addition, I really don't like the idea of *automatically* > overwriting the file immediately after *automatically* replacing some > of the tiddlers in the document. Inasmuch as <<loadTiddlers>> > processing has minimal user interaction, you might not notice which > tiddlers are being replaced during the import. Sure, a backup file is > usually created when you save the document, but backing out the > updated tiddlers while retaining any other changes you might have made > can be a real hassle and should be avoided whenever possible. At the > very least, a manual 'save file' action means that the user has a > *chance* to review what was imported *before* overwriting their saved > document. In the scenario I'm in I will be controlling the source wiki and just using LoadTiddlersPlugin to distributed updated plugins or stylesheets changes so the risk is reduced (but certainly not eliminated). Thanks for your input though. Jonathan --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To post to this group, send email to TiddlyWiki@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to tiddlywiki+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/TiddlyWiki?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
