Re: Slowness issue with git completion

[Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>]

On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 11:34 PM, Mikael Magnusson <mikachu@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 26 April 2011 22:23, Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Apr 26, 2011 at 9:43 PM, Frank Terbeck <ft@bewatermyfriend.org> wrote:
>>> Felipe Contreras wrote:
>>>> It's very easy to reproduce:
>>>> % git clone git://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux-2.6.git
>>>> linux
>>>> % cd linux
>>>> % git log v<tab>
>>>>
>>>> It will take a looong time to figure out anything, specially if not
>>>> cached. I think I recall investigating the issue and finding that it's
>>>> looking for *all* the files in the git repo.
>>>
>>> Well yes. This is a known issue.
>>>
>>> I'm fairly sure that this is due to _multi_parts, which probably doesn't
>>> scale for jobs like that.  I once gave rewriting all that a shot and
>>> ended up with a number of helpers for each "type" of file etc. (like
>>> modified or ignored files).  While they were significantly quicker than
>>> the current code, they were probably still full of bugs and
>>> shortcomings. Also, I would have had to rewrite *large* parts of the
>>> rest of the completion, which would have been a *major* undertaking.
>>>
>>> In short: It's a known issue and it's very hard to fix (if only because
>>> it is a *lot* of work).
>>
>> Here's a quick solution: don't try to list files. If I want to list
>> files, I would use '-- '. And in fact, that's exactly what the bash
>> completion does.
>
> git accepts files with or without a --

So?

>> Moreover, why do you want to be smarter than git? There are ways to
>> ask git precisely what we want: list the contents of certain tree-ish
>> on-demand. And in fact, that's exactly what the bash completion does:
>>
>> time git ls-tree HEAD -- (0m0.005s)
>> time git ls-tree HEAD -- drivers/ (0m0.007s)
>
> git ls-tree doesn't allow you to filter the output files by 'changed',
> 'new', 'unknown' etc etc.

So?

>> Seriously, this is very annoying.
>
> This type of comment is not productive.

Well, I have been waiting a long time for this to be fixed, if this is
a known issue, and you already know it's very annoying, and there's no
plan to fix it, I can only assume that you don't care. So I guess I
should use the bash completion.

-- 
Felipe Contreras