From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Stefan Monnier Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: VC's modeline (was: [Emacs-diffs] master de76a16: Performance improvements for vc-hg) Date: Mon, 08 Feb 2016 16:39:26 -0500 Message-ID: References: <20160208185311.9470.7389@vcs.savannah.gnu.org> <56B8F682.7040404@dancol.org> <83io1zosv7.fsf@gnu.org> <56B8FA6D.9070105@dancol.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1454967598 20950 80.91.229.3 (8 Feb 2016 21:39:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 8 Feb 2016 21:39:58 +0000 (UTC) Cc: Eli Zaretskii , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Daniel Colascione Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Feb 08 22:39:48 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aStXA-0006NX-DK for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 22:39:48 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49082 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aStX9-0003Kf-Rn for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 16:39:47 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:42941) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aStWv-0003KX-GX for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 16:39:34 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aStWs-0005sQ-7o for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 16:39:33 -0500 Original-Received: from pruche.dit.umontreal.ca ([132.204.246.22]:42127) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aStWs-0005sG-38; Mon, 08 Feb 2016 16:39:30 -0500 Original-Received: from pastel.home (lechon.iro.umontreal.ca [132.204.27.242]) by pruche.DIT.UMontreal.CA (8.14.1/8.14.1) with ESMTP id u18LdOpc012298; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 16:39:24 -0500 Original-Received: by pastel.home (Postfix, from userid 20848) id 2B0B360178; Mon, 8 Feb 2016 16:39:26 -0500 (EST) In-Reply-To: <56B8FA6D.9070105@dancol.org> (Daniel Colascione's message of "Mon, 8 Feb 2016 12:28:29 -0800") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/25.1.50 (gnu/linux) X-NAI-Spam-Flag: NO X-NAI-Spam-Threshold: 5 X-NAI-Spam-Score: 0 X-NAI-Spam-Rules: 1 Rules triggered RV5575=0 X-NAI-Spam-Version: 2.3.0.9418 : core <5575> : inlines <4296> : streams <1584420> : uri <2136619> X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: Genre and OS details not recognized. X-Received-From: 132.204.246.22 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:199561 Archived-At: > vc has been in place for decades, and is one of the things that makes > programming on Emacs pleasant. I'm not in favor of just removing the > feature because there are a few unfixed bugs. There is nothing > fundamentally wrong with the model. Agreed. What I think is wrong the level of detail expected in the status line. E.g. I think it'd be fine for VC to just display "Bzr" (or "Hg", or "Git", or what have you) instead. I think it'd even be fine to do that without checking whether the file is really under that VCS's control or not (i.e. without checking whether the file is ignored). IOW, a file opened in a directory with a ".git" somewhere in the parents could just say "Git", without any other check. > There is no reason that vc integration can't work well and be on by > default. Having to call a "git" process twice per find-file-noselect is a high price for a very small benefit. > It was working before my change; now it works better. Yes, I'm really not arguing against your change. > A reasonable performance improvement should not be an occasion for > discussing the removal of a feature made faster. Sorry. It just reminded me of this problem that's been around for a while. Stefan