Thank you, Wayne. Let me know if there's anything you want me to look into or do - I've missed a lot of the new code and don't really have time to work out from scratch what went wrong, but I'll gladly help out with a point in the right direction. And let me know if you do you want me to put it behind an option. As much as I like this feature, it's more important to me that the chooser be quick and responsive.
On Thu, Dec 28, 2017 at 09:56:50PM +0000, Wayne Stambaugh wrote: > I don't think it's the footprint preview that is the issue. I think > something happened when the symbol library table progress dialog was > added or afterwards. When I added the symbol library table code, it was > slow the first time you opened the chooser because the symbol library > table uses lazy loading so all 90+ symbol libraries (assuming you are > using the default symbol library table) get loaded. After the initial > load, it was very fast. Something has changed since then and it appears > the symbol library table is being reloaded every time the chooser is > launched. Once I plow through my backlog of patches to test and merge, > I will take a look at it. > > Wayne > > On 12/28/2017 04:48 PM, Jeff Young wrote: > > Something definitely happened. It was fast for me, but now takes several > > seconds. > > > > On the other hand, not having it would be worse. > > > > Cheers, > > Jeff. > > > >> On 28 Dec 2017, at 20:58, Chris Pavlina <pavlina.ch...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> How many have noticed a drop in performance in the component chooser, > >> particularly surrounding footprint preview? I've noticed a rise in > >> complaints about it, including one now who's saying it takes around two > >> seconds to open every time. I'm not sure if something changed since I > >> wrote it or if I'm just getting more complaints as it gets tested on a > >> wider range of systems. > >> > >> If the performance is poor, I may option out the footprint > >> preview/chooser before release so we don't release a turkey. I > >> definitely don't have time to actually _fix_ it before then. So... what > >> are people seeing for performance here? It's still fast for me but I'm > >> using it with a small library on a fast system. > >> > >> -- > >> Chris > >> > >> _______________________________________________ > >> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > >> Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net > >> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > >> More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > > Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net > > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp > > > > _______________________________________________ > Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net > Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers > More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers Post to : kicad-developers@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~kicad-developers More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp