Re: [PATCH 1/2] Update the bash prompt from 'applied' instead of the obsolete 'current'

From: Catalin Marinas <catalin.marinas@gmail.com>
Date: May 21, 2007, 09:31 UTC
Message-ID: <b0943d9e0705210231j75ef2e57o922f7899f4b5814b@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <20070521074838.GA32510@diana.vm.bytemark.co.uk>

On 21/05/07, Karl Hasselström <kha@treskal.com> wrote:

Show 12 quoted lines

> On 2007-05-20 23:22:00 +0200, Robin Rosenberg wrote:
> > Calling stg is too slow to be be used here. I that command in my
> > first draft for this function and people complained (see the thread
> > named "Bash snippet to show branch and patch in bash prompt"). It
> > takes ~ 0.15s on here which is very noticable, barely below my pain
> > threshold.
> >
> > We'll update the prompt when and if Karl breaks this.
>
> Yes, I can confirm that I'm hard at work breaking this. :-) I'm trying
> out a way to get around the performance bug Catalin found, but I
> didn't have time to finish it yesterday.

My plan is to release a 0.13 version pretty soon but without the DAG patches as we might have to test them a bit more. The release after 0.13 I'd like to be a 1.0-rc1 (including the DAG patches) unless we have some other major changes pending.

> But it sucks that stg starts so slowly. It has gotten better, I
> believe (I think Catalin did some work here?), but 150 ms doesn't
> really qualify as "instantaneous".

I don't think we can get much slower than this. I modified stg to only load the modules needed for a given command but it still takes around 150ms for a command like 'top'. I don't know any other python tricks to make it start faster.

BTW, any of you would like to get added as a member to gna.org/projects/stgit (there are no advantages, only e-mail updates for filed bug reports)?

Regards.

-- 
Catalin