Re: fprintf_ln() is slow

From: Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com>
Date: Jun 27, 2019, 21:55 UTC
Message-ID: <xmqqimsqae1r.fsf@gitster-ct.c.googlers.com>
In-Reply-To: <20190627212154.GB20250@sigill.intra.peff.net>

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

Show 5 quoted lines

> I'm also not entirely convinced it's worth caring about this problem at
> all (whether the solution is buffering here, or just adding the "\n"
> back to the original strings). It's true that p1451 shows off a
> measurable improvement, but I think it's a silly, pathological case. I'd
> be surprised if anybody ever noticed the difference in the real world.

Yup, exactly my thought.

> The biggest benefit I see to dealing with it is not performance, but
> that it makes our messages more likely to appear atomically in the
> output (if multiple entities are writing to stderr).

I was primarily in favor of getting rid of *printf_ln() functions (there are some 200+ callsites if I counted correctly) as I found it a bit distracting.