Alberto Bertogli wrote: > While tracking a darcsweb issue that was posted to the darcs-users list > (and it seems to be a darcs bug), I noticed that getting a diff for a > given patch felt slow. > > So when I saw your mail, I decided to make a quick comparison on the > time it took to get a diff (in each SCM native format, so nobody had to > play any conversion tricks.) > > A cache-hot 'darcs changes -v --match "hash \ > 20080806124109-2067a-217fcccd6ce7becfb9a07f10e6c4a29cb00805f5.gz"' > on a freshly-cloned darcs' repository takes 0.162s with and without > colors. > > A cache-hot 'git show 0ce3a7e5bd305e96c924fab1e3126480c665f017' on the > linux kernel repository takes 0.012s with nice coloring, 0.010s without.
This is interesting. For my curiosity, Alberto, would you mind throwing in your comparison for: darcs annotate --match "hash \ 20080806124109-2067a-217fcccd6ce7becfb9a07f10e6c4a29cb00805f5.gz" I tend to prefer annotate to look at a particular patch diff rather than changes and it appears that annotate is indeed more optimized than changes in this case. On a random patch I see that ``darcs annotate`` has time: real 0m0.015s user 0m0.004s sys 0m0.008s ...and ``darcs changes -v`` has time: real 0m0.105s user 0m0.052s sys 0m0.032s -- --Max Battcher-- http://www.worldmaker.net/ _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
