In general yes I would agree with you -- but within this domain, surely
all the implementation languages of note are available on all the
platforms that it is desirable to use them on?
Solaris x86 and maybe some BSDs are a problem with darcs.
-- O.L.
On 2006-03-01, Olivier Lefevre [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
In general yes I would agree with you -- but within this domain, surely
all the implementation languages of note are available on all the
platforms that it is desirable to use them on?
Solaris x86 and maybe some BSDs are a problem with
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 02:40:50PM -0600, Matt Mackall wrote:
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 09:09:30PM +0100, Radoslaw Szkodzinski wrote:
- Darcs' programming language is Haskell, which is compiled.
Mercurial is in Python - interpreted language as of yet.
Python is compiled - to portable byte
Matt Mackall wrote:
Mercurial does no merging internally. But with the right tools
installed (merge and kdiff3, for example), the hgmerge script will
automatically merge non-conflicting changes.
Matt: Thanks for inventing Mercurial.
The deep difference between darcs and Mercurial is that
Purely from a use perspective, the implementation language should be of
no importance whatsoever.
Wrong: platform support is strongly influenced by the implementation
language.
-- O.L.
___
darcs-users mailing list
darcs-users@darcs.net
Radoslaw Szkodzinski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Major differences [between Darcs and Mercury]:
You forget about the most important difference. Darcs has far better
support for cherry-picking than any other VC system, free or otherwise.
I recommend Darcs if you need cherry-picking. If you
As Benoit Boissinot mentioned : Mercurial uses binary diff to store the
files. I don't know how Darcs is doing.
Current Darcs versions are hopelessly inefficient with binary files.
I'd like to know more about their efficiency on binary files, for
lots of my documents are binary.
Then
Bryan O'Sullivan wrote:
The big drawback of darcs is that it has a theory of patches :-)
In
many practical cases, it simply falls on its face and takes seemingly
exponential time and space to try to figure out the
interrelationships
between patches. My impression is that there is no sign
In many practical cases, it simply falls on its face and takes
seemingly exponential time and space to try to figure out the
interrelationships between patches.
Interestingly no-one replied to this assertion. Do darcs developers feel
that the problem of poison patches etc is one that will be
On 2/20/06, Radoslaw Szkodzinski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ruini Xue wrote:
I found distributed VCS is what I want, however there are so many of
them. After some basic reading, I want to choose between
darcs and mercurial. But I can no decide which is better, or what's
their main
On Mon, Feb 20, 2006 at 09:09:30PM +0100, Radoslaw Szkodzinski wrote:
Ruini Xue wrote:
I found distributed VCS is what I want, however there are so many of
them. After some basic reading, I want to choose between
darcs and mercurial. But I can no decide which is better, or what's
Bryan O'Sullivan [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Also, you should ask this same question on the darcs mailing list, where
no doubt you'll get a different answer :-)
You might not have realized that you _did_ post this on the darcs
ml ;-).
--
Matthieu
Ruini Xue wrote:
I found distributed VCS is what I want, however there are so many of
them. After some basic reading, I want to choose between
darcs and mercurial. But I can no decide which is better, or what's
their main differences and how about their future development?
Better
On Mon, 2006-02-20 at 07:55 +0800, Ruini Xue wrote:
After some basic reading, I want to choose between
darcs and mercurial. But I can no decide which is better, or
what's their main differences and how about their future development?
They have profoundly different capabilities.
The big
On Mon, 2006-02-20 at 21:09 +0100, Radoslaw Szkodzinski wrote:
Major differences:
- In Darcs you can enforce that a testsuite is run before committing
You can do this in Mercurial, too. Use a precommit hook.
- Darcs stores binary files more efficiently I think.
That is possible. Mercurial
On 2/21/06, Radoslaw Szkodzinski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ruini Xue wrote:I found distributed VCS is what I want, however there are so many of them. After some basic reading, I want to choose betweendarcs and mercurial.But I can no decide which is better, or what's
their main differences and how
Radoslaw Szkodzinski [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Ruini Xue wrote:
I found distributed VCS is what I want, however there are so many
of them. After some basic reading, I want to choose between darcs
and mercurial. But I can no decide which is better, or what's
their main differences and how
* Radoslaw Szkodzinski [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2006-02-20 21:09:30 +0100]:
- Darcs stores binary files more efficiently I think.
Just the opposite, darcs stores binary files in an extremely inefficient
manner; a binary patch consists of the entire old contents of the file
in hex, followed by the
18 matches
Mail list logo
