From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 9931 invoked by alias); 4 Jun 2017 00:54:33 -0000 Mailing-List: contact zsh-workers-help@zsh.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk X-No-Archive: yes List-Id: Zsh Workers List List-Post: List-Help: X-Seq: 41212 Received: (qmail 4769 invoked from network); 4 Jun 2017 00:54:33 -0000 X-Qmail-Scanner-Diagnostics: from mail-vk0-f46.google.com by f.primenet.com.au (envelope-from , uid 7791) with qmail-scanner-2.11 (clamdscan: 0.99.2/21882. spamassassin: 3.4.1. Clear:RC:0(209.85.213.46):SA:0(-0.0/5.0):. Processed in 1.154495 secs); 04 Jun 2017 00:54:33 -0000 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.1 (2015-04-28) on f.primenet.com.au X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3,RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL,SPF_PASS,T_DKIM_INVALID autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no version=3.4.1 X-Envelope-From: schaefer@brasslantern.com X-Qmail-Scanner-Mime-Attachments: | X-Qmail-Scanner-Zip-Files: | Received-SPF: pass (ns1.primenet.com.au: SPF record at _netblocks.google.com designates 209.85.213.46 as permitted sender) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=brasslantern-com.20150623.gappssmtp.com; s=20150623; h=from:message-id:date:in-reply-to:comments:references:to:subject :mime-version; bh=ndBlOAHnzP7ayxGMiQWrtpf8Fky3IAjBAlbp7XvTJVQ=; b=DqOux0Y2R3jxepaf4w+7t+YYTjBHsagZCQdzvKqUl4w9pjEeOnWx5V+sugBbYU54Xy pPrUA+CYSD0GNcYuYBOtJZtomDdSgzu2fLs+mcp3ZQjKL5awe/Lu2jKtwRJJQ+Mc3ZP9 kX1PTv1u1K7Gnj2uldP4zhnl1UgGHMLO36BOSBfyarJmwfjchocw1PJqmrKl2OFPZ/6p v5UY5e+I+WefgZyRmmOrnnNxxSYYl97T1Bm9YLoEBNYgAQrXJIcTE6wxRzH/TIu8ZGDg wh2pIAmzmpQWnngDeEC3gK/z1egAaCrRPldd//lyKw/k8uKDVvLlYMe5UeDG6zGAHl96 4Tnw== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:date:in-reply-to:comments :references:to:subject:mime-version; bh=ndBlOAHnzP7ayxGMiQWrtpf8Fky3IAjBAlbp7XvTJVQ=; b=c09Gn06TY5h06Da6XWPlqntQcqc7srqvZ8DN9bukk5PlarxqAh5aCYqnHaXzGLo9Sq ESnW/4I9kGCWPEw3EVtzDMfLQnMpcmXcV6Rz5jZAdjpp3CvMNX6CDlcoHKFfG2VUxBb/ +CsIoHthgZGYHiBy2MZAgrc5s1D4cfNsuvnovZkGflIisP9+FQnVdKcey1ykEPH7k4GR dK3vwSmyt6H5TzPtiYYR5DNGK6102+JnXMd9ITgk/av5kkk8sEgflQ1Y5YX5PotBYING oQnOIDoIXWU2DM0hH5cNW9X8DxDGIxnWOIhxcb1ERKxK8zGXfHmOTIHV3/4nX0iEY9pJ KuUg== X-Gm-Message-State: AODbwcDYRMWHp89d+wjZZtF+R2Pr6s/IliRdt+6tKzlO+LpAQ8E8RPls eH8H1YMk/CwNH+qdMH8= X-Received: by 10.31.4.142 with SMTP id 136mr3723907vke.35.1496537667793; Sat, 03 Jun 2017 17:54:27 -0700 (PDT) From: Bart Schaefer Message-Id: <170603175449.ZM16110@torch.brasslantern.com> Date: Sat, 3 Jun 2017 17:54:49 -0700 In-Reply-To: Comments: In reply to Sebastian Gniazdowski "Re: Improving zcompdump (Re: A patch with hashtable optimization, which doesn't work)" (Jun 3, 4:11pm) References: X-Mailer: OpenZMail Classic (0.9.2 24April2005) To: zsh-workers@zsh.org Subject: Re: Improving zcompdump (Re: A patch with hashtable optimization, which doesn't work) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii On Jun 3, 4:11pm, Sebastian Gniazdowski wrote: } Subject: Re: Improving zcompdump (Re: A patch with hashtable optimization, } } On 20 maja 2017 at 19:08:09, Bart Schaefer (schaefer@brasslantern.com) wrote: } > How much does zcompdump actually help? Have you compared startup with } > and without it? Haven't seen that yet (nor tried it myself, tho). } > One lesson learned with Completion/Base/Utility/_store_cache is that } > parsing array assignments is expensive. } } Results seem to confirm what you said I also tried something similar ... using the just the default set of completions, more wall-clock time is spent restoring the autoloads than loading the _comps array, at least on my system.