RFC: startup time - again

[John Arbash Meinel]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1


...

> 
> But I am still unclear why bzr would need C whereas hg does not. I am a
> bit skeptical about the fact that bzr higher abstractions than hg cost
> so much. At least, from what I could read in this thread, I can't say I
> have seen really tangible proof that C is needed.

Actually, they do. Last I checked they had several required C extensions. (The
diff and patch code is in C, I don't remember what else off-hand.)

Some of the other things, are arguable choices along the way. For example, bzr
works in Unicode paths. This means that we take more time (and generally
memory) as we decode from 8-bit strings into Unicode strings. On the flip
side, it means that when I check it "جوجو.txt" on Linux, I get the same thing
on Windows and Mac, rather than "جوجو.txt" (On Windows it will default to
something like cp1250/latin-1 for 8-bit filenames, while on Linux it is UTF-8,
even though Windows is actually a "wide-char" or UTF-16 filesystem.)

We've worked pretty hard to structure our code to work *with* the platform
when possible. And we've actually caught up with 'hg status' on large trees.
Though occasionally we do regress.

John
=:->

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFIx0itJdeBCYSNAAMRAvsrAKCk5mMHH3318QiCXPh6oc9J7lPwhgCgxxsO
jcAKwzOtg6u85+Ivb75fG/I=
=AFRH
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----