I understand the goal of the patch index (see issue 1566 for background), and would love to have faster annotate and changes commands. However, I'm confused by the complexity of the current design. Why can't the problem be solved by including patch summaries in the inventory files? By patch summaries, I mean that each patch in hashed_inventory would look something like this:
[update the frobnitz John Doe <[email protected]>**20120319211029 Ignore-this: c69c695e19698f612e5c72931c88b47f ] hash: 0000000463-474892955156df814cb1659ce0b692155990e04680e30b0044cf8e604eb8e63 hunk ./src/Darcs/Annotate.hs 49 -1 +1 hunk ./src/Darcs/Annotate.hs 175 -1 +1 hunk ./tests/foo.sh 75 -4 +9 replace ./src/Darcs/Arguments.hs [A-Za-z_0-9] substract subtract I can traverse the entire inventory on screened in about .2s so we could quickly select all patches affecting a given file. It also seems that having patch summaries in the inventory files would offer many of the benefits of v3 prims (patch commute without loading most patch content) without being so far reaching. The patch summaries would also make a partial annotate command faster (annotate ./foo lines 10-24) since patches affecting irrelevant lines could be skipped quickly. Can the darcs gurus help me understand why this approach hasn't been pursued (or was pursued and abandoned)? Thanks. -- Michael _______________________________________________ darcs-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.osuosl.org/mailman/listinfo/darcs-users
