Junio C Hamano <gitster@xxxxxxxxx> writes: > Dirk Gouders <dirk@xxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >> Oh yes, you are right (as far as I can say): I would change this to >> something like: >> >> "Asking for this list of filtered objects may cause performance >> implications, however, because in this case, despite filtering objects, >> the possibly much larger set of all reachable objects must be processed >> in order to populate that list." > > Better, but the verb "cause" applied to "performance implications" > feels funny. It may "have" implications. Alternatively, it may > "cause" degradations. As implications can be both positive or > negative, it would be better to say "cause performancedegradations" > when you know if it is negative. Thank you for the clarification with "implications" I will fix it. Dirk >> (Later in the document, it is suggested to do timing with the two >> versions, which kind of follows up on the performance impact that is >> focused on, here. So, this doesn't remain an unresolved detail.) > > Great. > > Thanks.
