On 11/7/2019 1:40 AM, Jeff King wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 06, 2019 at 08:21:48AM -0500, Derrick Stolee wrote:
>
>>>> Now that we changed this method, very fast commands show no progess at
>>>> all. This means we need to stop testing for seeing these progress lines
>>>> in the test suite.
>>>
>>> I think this is OK for now, though it does make me wonder if
>>> "--progress" ought to perhaps override "delayed" in some instances,
>>> since it's a positive signal from the caller that they're interested in
>>> seeing progress.
>>
>> I was thinking that we could start with a GIT_TEST_PROGRESS environment
>> variable to force all delayed progress to act like non-delayed progress.
>> That would at least give us confirmation on these kinds of tests.
>
> I think this could actually be a non-test variable. E.g., something like
> this:
>
> diff --git a/progress.c b/progress.c
> index 0063559aab..74b90e8898 100644
> --- a/progress.c
> +++ b/progress.c
> @@ -14,6 +14,7 @@
> #include "strbuf.h"
> #include "trace.h"
> #include "utf8.h"
> +#include "config.h"
>
> #define TP_IDX_MAX 8
>
> @@ -269,7 +270,8 @@ static struct progress *start_progress_delay(const char *title, uint64_t total,
>
> struct progress *start_delayed_progress(const char *title, uint64_t total)
> {
> - return start_progress_delay(title, total, 2, 0);
> + int delay_in_secs = git_env_ulong("GIT_PROGRESS_DELAY", 2);
> + return start_progress_delay(title, total, delay_in_secs, 0);
> }
>
> struct progress *start_progress(const char *title, uint64_t total)
I like this idea. It allows us to force the progress on in tests, and for
users to tweak their preferred delay. That includes _increasing_ the delay
if they want to.
> which lets you ask for more verbose progress. There are times when I'd
> use something like this for general debugging. Though these days I might
> suggest that something like GIT_TRACE2_PERF hook the progress code to
> output. That's a bit more complicated to implement, though.
Would it make sense to make delay_in_secs a local static variable, so we
remember it between calls? That would allow us to check the environment only
once (not that it is usually expensive).
-Stolee
