On 29 Apr 2008, at 16:36, zooko wrote:

> I didn't try it.  Here -- now that you ask so nicely, I'll do so.

That wasn't an order to re-run the benchmarks, just a question :)  But  
thanks anyway


> Okay, the result is that darcs-2-format performs exactly the same  
> way that hashed-format does on the "darcs get --lazy" test.
>
> I think the point of the darcs-2-format is new improved patch  
> semantics:


Ok, since I have no need to preserve darcs-1 compatability and the new  
format is as fast as the hashed one, I'll continue to use darcs-2 repos.

Cheers
Ashley


-- 
http://www.patchspace.co.uk/
http://aviewfromafar.net/



_______________________________________________
darcs-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users

Reply via email to