[darcs-users] darcs patch: add exception to haskell_policy.sh for D... (and 61 more)
kowey at darcs.net
Thu Oct 30 17:36:56 UTC 2008
On Thu, Oct 30, 2008 at 13:17:47 -0400, David Roundy wrote:
> Unless you've named them wrong, it looks like salvo-9b has on the an effect
> of slowing darcs down, when it has any significant effect. That doesn't
> sound like a good optimization...
Note also that it is more useful to think of this salvo as code-cleanup
than optimisation (I might have presented it the wrong way in my
> It'd also be good to test against pre-salvo-8 with or without bytestring.
> I don't strongly object to requiring bytestring, but given that we *know*
> that it's not as efficient as it could be by at least 10% or 20% (unless
> this is a timings error or a misnamed-files issue), it does seem worth
> tracking down what went wrong while we've still got two similar versions of
> darcs to test against.
Sure thing. I can maintain a pre and immediately-post-salvo 8
repository indefinitely, so I hope us waiting on this tests won't delay
this salvo arriving in the mainline (the suspense is killing us, me
> I'll run some quick tests on my computer to see how
> things look here. Could you try doing a darcs check test?
I've added it to the zoo. I've also extended my scripts to run the
tests several times, now pushed. Now I'll need to setup the
pre-and-post directories on the very fast machine at work and get to
Help still wanted in writing the script to take the mean of the scores,
to produce nice tables, and also a graphical visualisation. More info
Nothing tricky; it just needs doing!
Eric Kow <http://www.nltg.brighton.ac.uk/home/Eric.Kow>
PGP Key ID: 08AC04F9
-------------- 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/20081030/d0f60f7f/attachment.pgp
More information about the darcs-users