David Abrahams <[email protected]> writes: > Well, it could be a lot lazier about discovering changes.
Yes. I suspect there is still some quadratic algorithm hidden somewhere. > Right now it appears you store a complete diff of the repo and then > "fold" away the parts that shouldn't be displayed. Instead you could > gather just the information needed to display the buffer and then > gather the rest of the info during idle (or on demand, whichever comes > first). Yes, that sounds like a good approach. Is the "folding" thing even useful? What about showing the diff in another buffer instead of folding it out? It works great for small changes, in my experience, but I think I would prefer the SPC / DEL paging behavior for bigger changes.
