Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Re: give us a hand with arch

[Andrea Arcangeli]

On Sat, Sep 27, 2003 at 12:16:03PM +0100, Bruce Stephens wrote:
> "Mark A. Flacy" <address@hidden> writes:
> 
> [...]
> 
> > Then run some tests and *see* if the Darkly Hinted Efficiency
> > Improvements materialize.  Nothing convinces quite like hard data.
> 
> Just to clarify my objectives, I don't think this different
> implementation of explicit would be particularly faster.  Or not
> faster enough that it would matter (I think tla is fast enough, now).
> 
> I think if (as Andrea suggested) explicit were made the default
> tagging method, then the current implementation would be regarded as
> horrible.

yes, given I think I learnt how to already implement the strict commits
through explicit tagging, so now yes, it's only a point to make the
explicit powerful as the tagline.

I attempted to outline an idea in point 3 but maybe it's totally broken ;)
and I don't know well the current 'explicit' implementation in the first
place.

Andrea - If you prefer relying on open source software, check these links:
            rsync.kernel.org::pub/scm/linux/kernel/bkcvs/linux-2.[45]/
            http://www.cobite.com/cvsps/
            svn://svn.kernel.org/linux-2.[46]/trunk