This is the mail archive of the
mailing list for the Cygwin project.
RE: bash-completion load times
- From: Adam Dinwoodie <Adam dot Dinwoodie at metaswitch dot com>
- To: "cygwin at cygwin dot com" <cygwin at cygwin dot com>
- Date: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 16:31:43 +0000
- Subject: RE: bash-completion load times
- Deferred-delivery: Wed, 10 Apr 2013 16:31:00 +0000
- References: <CE9C056E12502146A72FD81290379E9A6093A204 at ENFIRHMBX1 dot datcon dot co dot uk> <20130409212105 dot GA8645 at phoenix>
Gary Johnson wrote:
> Cygwin's bash-completion package is version 1.3. Versions 1.9 and
> later use dynamic loading of completions that is supposed to
> improve the loading times. I think your best bet is to wait for the
> Cygwin package to be updated to the latest 2.1 version and see how
> that improves performance. Or just download and install it from
> source yourself.
I'll give that a try when I have a chance, and report back on what difference
> That said, I'm surprised by the variation in load times of the files
> in /etc/bash_completion.d that you observed. Those files all start
> with a call to the have() function which should abort further
> processing of the file if the corresponding program is not
The results I was seeing were pretty consistent. I'd guess the difference is
due to either (a) some files being larger and thus taking significantly longer
to parse, (b) calls to have() being slow in Cygwin for some reason, or (c)
It should be relatively easy to distinguish between these experimentally.
However if upgrading to a later version of bash-completion solves the problem,
I suspect it won't be worth the effort.
Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html
Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple