Re: [arch-dev-public] [PATCH 0/7] Namcap performance improvements
On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 11:16 PM, Dan McGee <dan@archlinux.org> wrote:
In the spirit of Eli making a bunch of patches for the AUR, I finally decided to sit down tonight and figure out why the heck namcap was sucking it up, and did a little code cleanup along the way. namcap.py is now a bit cleaner and separated into functions, and the real treat is namcap is a hell of a lot faster now that I found the bottleneck, which was the depends hook. The first 6 patches in this series lead up to the 7th, which is where the speed increase is found.
Let me know what you see, otherwise it would be cool to get this in and a new namcap release made, as it has rather dramatic effects with regards to speed.
If you don't like patches, you can get all this from my git tree as well: http://code.toofishes.net/cgit/dan/namcap.git/log/?h=working
-Dan
Dan McGee (7): Rename 'tags' to 'namcap-tags' Only process tags if necessary Move extracted variable to the correct scope Only do active_modules check once Move PKGBUILD processing to a function Move real package processing to a function Make the depends module not suck
Namcap/depends.py | 104 +++++++++++++++++++------------- README | 10 ++-- namcap-tags | 65 ++++++++++++++++++++ namcap.py | 173 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------- setup.py | 2 +- tags | 65 -------------------- tests/tags-check | 4 +- 7 files changed, 224 insertions(+), 199 deletions(-) create mode 100644 namcap-tags delete mode 100644 tags
Pinging the namcap maintainer? -Dan
On Sun, Oct 11, 2009 at 1:07 PM, Dan McGee <dan@archlinux.org> wrote:
On Sun, Sep 27, 2009 at 11:16 PM, Dan McGee <dan@archlinux.org> wrote:
In the spirit of Eli making a bunch of patches for the AUR, I finally decided to sit down tonight and figure out why the heck namcap was sucking it up, and did a little code cleanup along the way. namcap.py is now a bit cleaner and separated into functions, and the real treat is namcap is a hell of a lot faster now that I found the bottleneck, which was the depends hook. The first 6 patches in this series lead up to the 7th, which is where the speed increase is found.
Let me know what you see, otherwise it would be cool to get this in and a new namcap release made, as it has rather dramatic effects with regards to speed.
If you don't like patches, you can get all this from my git tree as well: http://code.toofishes.net/cgit/dan/namcap.git/log/?h=working
-Dan
Dan McGee (7): Rename 'tags' to 'namcap-tags' Only process tags if necessary Move extracted variable to the correct scope Only do active_modules check once Move PKGBUILD processing to a function Move real package processing to a function Make the depends module not suck
Namcap/depends.py | 104 +++++++++++++++++++------------- README | 10 ++-- namcap-tags | 65 ++++++++++++++++++++ namcap.py | 173 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++-------------------------- setup.py | 2 +- tags | 65 -------------------- tests/tags-check | 4 +- 7 files changed, 224 insertions(+), 199 deletions(-) create mode 100644 namcap-tags delete mode 100644 tags
Pinging the namcap maintainer?
It's listed as Jason, who's account was removed in the last run of deletions. Anyone interested in maintaining namcap? I thought Hugo showed some interest here.
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 2:34 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
It's listed as Jason, who's account was removed in the last run of deletions.
Anyone interested in maintaining namcap? I thought Hugo showed some interest here.
Yeah. I am interested. :) BTW, great patches, Dan. Namcap was really slow and in need of such improvements. I will apply your patches and make a new namcap release. By some reason i missed all others threads about this. oO -- Hugo
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 4:10 PM, Hugo Doria <hugodoria@gmail.com> wrote:
On Mon, Oct 12, 2009 at 2:34 PM, Aaron Griffin <aaronmgriffin@gmail.com> wrote:
It's listed as Jason, who's account was removed in the last run of deletions.
Anyone interested in maintaining namcap? I thought Hugo showed some interest here.
Yeah. I am interested. :)
BTW, great patches, Dan. Namcap was really slow and in need of such improvements. I will apply your patches and make a new namcap release. By some reason i missed all others threads about this. oO
Because Hugo put his name here [1], I figured he was the maintainer and not Jason, so I wasn't reaching out to no one. I suppose I could have called Hugo out, but didn't want to sound mad, just didn't hear any response at all and sure enough he missed all of this, probably due to my horrible subject line in the original patch series that I forgot to change. Hugo- thanks, I just wanted to make sure they didn't get dropped on the floor. I'd be willing to *contribute* more as long as I don't have to play the role of maintainer/releaser. :) There was one comment I received regarding the patches in a private email; I responded to this person but got no reply. I'll forward it along to you. It looks like a fairly straightforward bug and hopefully the fix will be straightforward as well. -Dan [1] http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/DeveloperWiki:Internal_Projects#namcap
participants (4)
-
Aaron Griffin
-
Dan McGee
-
Dan McGee
-
Hugo Doria