Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Re: When can we make a compromise in Git completion?
- X-seq: zsh-workers 29160
- From: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: When can we make a compromise in Git completion?
- Date: Fri, 6 May 2011 02:01:20 +0300
- Cc: zsh-workers@xxxxxxx
- Dkim-signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:cc:content-type :content-transfer-encoding; bh=FFNFtTwaL7q5RvbLYhSdwgY6VddZoMpOeotSmED7bIU=; b=bBlMnxJBIGOhgjSywt7fCV1AJxtVu7fjfoBXtvuzwWJvkXONgasJyBHR8PGDhaSK7W TOXWEbr/t0kkESpCVti0bPMn1lX6yOIV3Jr/xS31g542XBiEGf3BLA/525ninKpU2NBo KpfMwiJjRwFz3WrD2FUv8neTnEOCPP6YQXKWE=
- Domainkey-signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=c/Ja9EWTpWNE2r0Xwc4+AsIQrI/4uEV7CgVTIvBldZv2NkBZNpNmrIeJuYKCTL5eYW 7/iA5w42javXUjhTEL17N0V93RLhPVA/aVXyFS1Tb1hLWBP6lL6r3+3bp+tsB6AbULnC Pk/ADfMBkYSVMn3yNXQ4O6dYDR84gtHK+neDs=
- In-reply-to: <110505153721.ZM20011@torch.brasslantern.com>
- List-help: <mailto:email@example.com>
- List-id: Zsh Workers List <zsh-workers.zsh.org>
- List-post: <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-workers-help@xxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
- References: <BANLkTi=qwBu+Kh6wd68-jYjF+TrcDogRfQ@mail.gmail.com> <110505153721.ZM20011@torch.brasslantern.com>
On Fri, May 6, 2011 at 1:37 AM, Bart Schaefer <schaefer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On May 6, 1:07am, Felipe Contreras wrote:
> } Subject: When can we make a compromise in Git completion?
> } Actually I saw that mail by looking at the archives, but I didn't
> } notice the patch. I have tried the patch, it's still *dead slow* for
> } me. Again, I don't think this can be solved without writing new git
> } plumbing. You need to avoid 'git ls-files'.
> With the patch, however, it's possible for you to plug in your own
> different plumbing using zstyle.
> zstyle ':completion::complete:git:*:files' command ...
> where you put your alternate plumbing in where I have "...".
I don't think it would be that easy.
> Then when you have something that works as fast/accurately as you care
> about, you can let us know.
> If that's not good enough you can rewrite __git_files (or any of the
> other functions in the _git file) from scratch; there's a reason that
> the source file tests (( $+functions[__git_files] )) || ... before
> each function is defined: so that you can override them simply by
> defining your own flavor before _git is autoloaded.
I believe every __git_.*_files has to be changed. So again, not that easy.
Why would I even try if the result of this work is going to the trash?
First you tell me you would consider it for merging, then I will try
it, no point otherwise.
> } So. At which point are you going to be willing to accept the fact that
> } it's not possible to fix the performance without making a compromise?
> Roughly at the time you stop taking such an antagonistic stance about
> it, I suspect. Really, you're not doing your efforts any favors by
> framing the discussion the way you do.
This has nothing to do with feelings, it's a technical issue. Either
you are willing to make a compromise or not.
You pointed to other mailing list customs earlier, well, on the linux
kernel mailing list politeness is not a requisite, code is: "talk is
cheap, show me the code". But what I hear you saying is; "we don't
want that code".
It is a simple question, why can't you give a straight answer?
Messages sorted by: