Wincent Colaiuta <win@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > El 9/9/2007, a las 3:36, Andreas Ericsson escribió: > >> Yup. I applaud your efforts, but it does come with a slight >> overhead, except where it replaces faulty code. In practice, it's >> probably better to use the api for all the string-handling, as none >> of it is performance-critical. > > Have any performance numbers been posted yet? I thought some had and > that they showed pretty much no statistically-significant difference > (or maybe I'm thinking of David's pack-index patch...) Well, we get a lot of those statistically-insignificant patches these days. I imagine that the difference would become more prominent with my patch when running out of memory. I just don't have a large test case on my disk right now. However, there were also some test cases for the stringbuf stuff, and they were also insignificant to slightly faster. > Performance is a very important question (given that Git is self- > described as a "Fast Version Control System"), but right after it > come the questions of maintainability and robustness: if the string > API makes the code easier to read (better maintainability) and > harder to make mistakes (more robust) then that needs to be weighed > up against the performance changes (if any can be measured). There is a reason we are not coding in assembly language. -- David Kastrup, Kriemhildstr. 15, 44793 Bochum - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
