Zsh Mailing List Archive
Messages sorted by:
Re: Slowness issue with git completion
- X-seq: zsh-workers 29071
- From: Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: Nikolai Weibull <now@xxxxxxxx>
- Subject: Re: Slowness issue with git completion
- Date: Wed, 27 Apr 2011 01:25:32 +0300
- Cc: Mikael Magnusson <mikachu@xxxxxxxxx>, Frank Terbeck <ft@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>, 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=WQtm6nJrJUP8TSJxCgJYJWDj8yLHWjHUwSWH2KcRIRo=; b=EE34i6sYN7tgwBXFuT7BzQCo3Ma8uDH0rlY/6+5bXuQPazIcuo9jid/jZccUzHQy52 9QZoSGA2qGfspNCQZY8GAPvgIVYFBbRXJ5cEyRbhvh2owvZxQgyJwdvYH4oOMy2KdEKe XhS56zUrmVQqPHarz7vEcZ8rD9oQyak1uscvM=
- 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=RjC4Y8LXn2B1ROrbB9zXSHdQkTbf2hL2EAe3v1AF0qIlg7xTbXk0xTPoT8MoEg2zPE iBKBixN5wuEnJm9LO4Sx6nMpyi1Vx2uU3UA9RtKxB1bNzy+paY6TU9HrFZO6d3FgtQg0 lh9tCki2/Hw06zDiegbiCy0obn1T78DWzylyw=
- In-reply-to: <BANLkTi=AgTZNVCjqUB7LSbnQyMLPUfkT5Q@mail.gmail.com>
- List-help: <mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org>
- List-id: Zsh Workers List <zsh-workers.zsh.org>
- List-post: <mailto:email@example.com>
- Mailing-list: contact zsh-workers-help@xxxxxxx; run by ezmlm
- References: <BANLkTinKo=W8umz=JfneD3MNYdmv=xYhFQ@mail.gmail.com> <firstname.lastname@example.org> <BANLkTim6WJWCrfLokA045Sc8su8DMXnKNw@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTi=eLWad_TB4L=chD=3Fb_Pd9AQyqQ@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTi=PrLsikjVhA-e06gjEkkxDpsdVaw@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTi=N0DjXbf70LCo422DQ_2b0_dK_AQ@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTikwk=OUQ7TzQB6FNcD2wztj+LHOGw@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTinadx+av3XhHrdem8aNqp=k7Gm69Q@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTikLMKZmCAxt=Ac-t-R_ZccZMt3pqg@mail.gmail.com> <BANLkTi=AgTZNVCjqUB7LSbnQyMLPUfkT5Q@mail.gmail.com>
On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 1:03 AM, Nikolai Weibull <now@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 23:35, Felipe Contreras
> <felipe.contreras@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> On Wed, Apr 27, 2011 at 12:13 AM, Mikael Magnusson <mikachu@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>>> It's only slow in repos as large as the linux one.
>> No. It's slow everywhere, it's *dead* slow on Linux. And BTW, there's
>> thousands of developers working on Linux (the kernel), I guess we are
>> not important.
> So perhaps you can improve it then. Or one of the thousands of
> developers working on Linux (the kernel). (I don’t believe that a
> very large fraction of them actually use Zsh,
And now I see why.
> though, or someone would
> have already provided a patch.) Or perhaps you could patch the kernel
> to make it faster?
It works fine in bash.
> I’ve spent innumerable hours on making it correct. I expect someone
> to pitch in a couple of hours to make it fast.
Well, kernel and git developers have spent many more hours to make git
fast, and this "correctness" is disrespecting that work because the
time it takes to execute the completion is longer than the command
> I find your attitude in this thread rather offensive.
Oh, if I say the current implementation is dead slow and unusable, you
find that offensive? Maybe you should understand that criticism to
code is not criticism to you. But I will tell you what I do when
somebody finds a fatal flaw in my software; I fix it. If the person is
offensive or cordial doesn't really matter, the fatal flaw is there.
Now, how about you make a compromise between "correctness" and
usability? There's many parts of the code marked as TODO, so I guess
the code is not "perfectly correct". Add one more TODO, so in the
meantime 'git add' shows unchanged files, which would make the rest of
the commands as fast as they should be.
I will tell you why I use completion; because I want to be more
productive. If completion makes me less productive, I will obviously
not use it... What's the point? I don't see why that is so hard to
understand. Note that this is the case also for small projects.
Are you interested in fixing this use-case even if it means to make
some compromises in correctness or not?
Messages sorted by: