[darcs-users] optimising darcs annotate (was: problem with --sendmail-command)
droundy at darcs.net
Tue Oct 7 14:59:03 UTC 2008
On Tue, Oct 07, 2008 at 01:01:23AM +0100, Eric Kow wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 06, 2008 at 16:56:05 -0700, Jason Dagit wrote:
> > I'm also still wondering what the previously discussed optimization to
> > annotate is that David mentioned in this thread:
> > http://firstname.lastname@example.org/msg05822.html
> > I asked for clarification back in August but no one replied. Where is this
> > well known solution documented?
> Thanks for bringing that to the forefront. I'm sure there is discussion
> on this buried in our mail archives somewhere.
> Also, I had a chance to speak with David a few weeks ago, and he
> sketched out an idea for darcs annotate (sadly, I haven't had time to
> transcribe my hand-written notes yet).
> As I understand it, the solution consists in building up some sort of
> cache that associates filenames to the patches that modify them. Could
> you confirm this, David?
Yes, any sort of mapping between files and patches that modify them
would do. It's a simple problem (albeit extremely tedious), so it
hasn't seemed worth documenting. Various people have volunteered to
do it (or one person twice), and I'm pretty certain it's in the bug
tracker as well.
A quick look at Performance-tagged bugs in the bug tracker shows
discussion of the problem in
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: Digital signature
Url : http://lists.osuosl.org/pipermail/darcs-users/attachments/20081007/0f8699f6/attachment.pgp
More information about the darcs-users