[gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Re: Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in dev-lang/python: ChangeLog python-2.6.ebuild python-2.5.2-r6.ebuild
Arun Raghavan wrote: I've not really got an opinion on the topic, per se, but fwiw, this is really not a meaningful statistic. *If* parsing strings in the ebuild is not a trivial part of the overall ebuild parsing process, then yes, this is a significant gain and should be treated as such. I find it unlikely that this would be the case. Sure, it's nothing that major, it's just one example of a free performance increase. (Although I would point out that parsing strings is basically what shells do.) Sure, that's nothing in the context of the actual install, but there were a few comments in the huge GLEP-55 thread about performance during cache generation. I'm not sure how one can go about measuring the impact of this on ebuild parsing as a whole. Maybe make take a few typical ebuilds, change quoting style, and run it through ebuild.sh in a loop. All the inherited eclasses would need to change too, though, I guess. Yeah, though I won't be doing it, I've kinda lost my enthusiasm; if anyone's learnt something they didn't know before, that's good enough.
[gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Re: Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in dev-lang/python: ChangeLog python-2.6.ebuild python-2.5.2-r6.ebuild
Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 20:28:43 +0100 Steve Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Fernando J. Pereda wrote: A big gain in the context of ebuilds and source packages. Well done. Yes, almost as important as not sourcing any ebuilds, so let's all stick an EAPI extension on the end of the filename. If you really think that EAPI as an extension has anything to do with performance You mentioned performance a few times in that lovely thread when it got shot down, I believe in the context of metadata generation: Performance hit (when discussing an alternative) [1] The GLEP is not about performance, but any solution that forces the introduction of a slowdown of more than, say, 20%, isn't viable. [2] It's several more directory reads. This is a measurable performance hit [3] Are you now saying performance doesn't matter? , you are even more sadly mistaken than usual My how the insults fly.. must be a new academic year. , and I suggest you lay off the GLEP 55 bashing until you've bothered to read it. Yeah cos obviously I never read it when it was last discussed. Way to go with unfounded, clearly absurd, assertions. [1] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/53512 [2] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/53751 [3] http://article.gmane.org/gmane.linux.gentoo.devel/53668
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Re: Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in dev-lang/python: ChangeLog python-2.6.ebuild python-2.5.2-r6.ebuild
On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 22:01:40 +0100 Ranjit Singh wrote: If you really think that EAPI as an extension has anything to do with performance You mentioned performance a few times in that lovely thread when it got shot down, I believe in the context of metadata generation: Performance hit (when discussing an alternative) [1] The GLEP is not about performance, but any solution that forces the introduction of a slowdown of more than, say, 20%, isn't viable. [2] It's several more directory reads. This is a measurable performance hit [3] Are you now saying performance doesn't matter? Please re-read what I said. EAPI as an extension has nothing to do with performance. This does not mean that an alternative that has significant performance implications is not a problem. I'll explain it for you in much simpler terms: equipping a car with a new kind of engine and fuel system that is much safer in the case of an accident is a good thing, but not if it also reduces the car's top speed to 30mph. -- Ciaran McCreesh signature.asc Description: PGP signature
Re: [gentoo-dev] Re: Re: Re: Re: [gentoo-commits] gentoo-x86 commit in dev-lang/python: ChangeLog python-2.6.ebuild python-2.5.2-r6.ebuild
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 10:01:40PM +0100, Steve Long wrote: Ciaran McCreesh wrote: On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 20:28:43 +0100 Steve Long [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Fernando J. Pereda wrote: A big gain in the context of ebuilds and source packages. Well done. Yes, almost as important as not sourcing any ebuilds, so let's all stick an EAPI extension on the end of the filename. If you really think that EAPI as an extension has anything to do with performance You mentioned performance a few times in that lovely thread when it got shot down, I believe in the context of metadata generation: Performance hit (when discussing an alternative) [1] The GLEP is not about performance, but any solution that forces the introduction of a slowdown of more than, say, 20%, isn't viable. [2] It's several more directory reads. This is a measurable performance hit [3] Are you now saying performance doesn't matter? No, performance is just a side effect it has never been part of the motivation of the GLEP. You are the only fighting over stupid pico optimizations. - ferdy pgpa4DJ4UDaap.pgp Description: PGP signature
