On Tue, Nov 17, 2015 at 12:18:28AM -0500, Jonathan Lebon wrote:
> > In the other thread I mentioned earlier, the solution I cooked up was
> > dropping highlighting entirely for hunks over a certain percentage of
> > highlighting. I wonder if we could do something similar here (e.g.,
> > don't matc
On Tue, Nov 3, 2015 at 5:03 PM, Jeff King wrote:
> Your is _much_ slower. I get:
>
> real0m25.538s
> user0m25.420s
> sys 0m0.120s
>
> for the old versus:
>
> real2m3.580s
> user2m3.548s
> sys 0m0.156s
Thanks for investigating and trying it out. I got the same r
On Tue, Nov 03, 2015 at 04:44:16PM -0500, Jeff King wrote:
> Have you looked at a diff of the old/new output on something like
> git.git?
This should be pretty easy to do (and time). I tried:
git log --oneline --color -p >base
time perl highlight.old old
time perl highlight.new new
diff
On Mon, Nov 02, 2015 at 09:05:33PM -0500, Jonathan Lebon wrote:
> As mentioned in the README, one of the current limitations of
> diff-highlight is that it only calculates highlights when the hunk
> contains the same number of removed lines as added lines.
>
> A further limitation upon this is th
As mentioned in the README, one of the current limitations of
diff-highlight is that it only calculates highlights when the hunk
contains the same number of removed lines as added lines.
A further limitation upon this is that diff-highlight assumes that the
first line removed matches the first lin
5 matches
Mail list logo