[Top][All Lists]

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

Re: [PATCH 0/2] Trivial fixes for setup.rb usage.

From: James Rowe
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0/2] Trivial fixes for setup.rb usage.
Date: Mon, 2 Dec 2019 13:27:14 +0000
User-agent: NeoMutt/20180716

* Eric Wong (address@hidden) wrote:
> James Rowe <address@hidden> wrote:
> > Given that the `Config` name was removed so long ago, an alternative fix
> > might be to remove `setup.rb` altogether?
> RubyGems is a huge barrier to startup performance; so users
> should be able to opt-out of using gems.  A painful thing is
> just having more gems installed (and even not using them)
> slows down startup.

  Wow, I hadn’t realised how costly that was.  As another data point for
your thoughts, my low-energy mobile Athlon reports:

▪ ~/P/dtas ψ:(master) ▶hyperfine --warmup 10 'dtas-ctl current'
Benchmark #1: dtas-ctl current
  Time (mean ± σ):     236.0 ms ±  17.0 ms    [User: 185.8 ms, System: 24.8 ms]
  Range (min … max):   226.1 ms … 282.0 ms    11 runs
▪ ~/P/dtas ψ:(master) ▶hyperfine --warmup 10 'ruby --disable=g -Ilib 
./bin/dtas-ctl current'
Benchmark #1: ruby --disable=g -Ilib ./bin/dtas-ctl current
  Time (mean ± σ):      30.6 ms ±   6.3 ms    [User: 21.1 ms, System: 4.6 ms]
  Range (min … max):    27.0 ms …  63.9 ms    65 runs

  On my system it makes little difference if you bypass gem’s script
wrapper unless you forcibly disable gems support like you suggest.




☒ Vote to destroy email signatures today!

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

reply via email to

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