[Top][All Lists]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

bug#19390: 25.0.50; `package-activate' is too slow

From: Artur Malabarba
Subject: bug#19390: 25.0.50; `package-activate' is too slow
Date: Thu, 18 Dec 2014 13:15:16 -0200

On 18 Dec 2014 08:37, "Dmitry Gutov" <address@hidden> wrote:
> On 12/18/2014 04:11 AM, Artur Malabarba wrote:
>> I agree. And no, IIUC this hasn't been implemented yet. I suggested a
>> couple of style improvements and haven't heard back.
> Sorry, got sidetracked. Installed with suggestions, except for the last docstring line (too obvious IMO).

Awesome :-)

> Still, I think we'd rather not spend too much time on reloading packages when upgrading, so please consider my latest patch.

There's a bit of a small flaw with that approach, it's the reason I used find-library.
If you just check load files against their names, you could find a wrong file that has the same name as a feature (we require files in the load path to be uniquely named, but load-history contains all files, not just those in the load path).

It's an edge case, and my opinion is that a good performance improvement is more important than that. But it seems like the 2 biggest performance improvements have already been made (the package initialize, and the file true name), so I wonder if it's worth it.

> Aside from it, if we compare with the alternative implementation suggestions, the current one reloads all dependencies, even those that haven't been (re)installed during the current session.

Is that so? Reading your patch, and from what I understand of the current implementation, they only reload packages on installation. So they shouldn't reload dependencies that weren't upgraded.

reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]