3 ms·

I can't help but think if a one-time initialisation cost is bogging a process down, there are bigger problems than that initialisation cost.

• a_t48 9y ago
  If you're running hundreds of very small tests, that one time initialization could take up a large portion of time.
  • mfukar 9y ago
    So...maybe...consolidate the process of executing hundreds of little things? How tiny do the steps in this thought process need to be? We can go on all night.
    • a_t48 9y ago
      It's cleanest if each test runs in a new execution context, so that tests can't effect one another.
      • mfukar 9y ago
        That's a naive solution to a tiny problem.
• coldtea 9y ago
  There are processes that you might need to run frequently. I gave an example above: showing the output of a Python script on your shell prompt (e.g. mercurial status).
  • majewsky 9y ago
    I moved from Python to Go for rendering my shell prompt for much the same reason: https://blog.bethselamin.de/posts/latency-matters.html https://blog.bethselamin.de/posts/latency-matters.html
    • coldtea 9y ago
      Funnily I did exactly the same -- rewrote parts of a powerline (shell prompt status enhancements) implementation that I used and was written in Python, and turned it into Go. But it still has to call into Python to get my mercurial status (we use mercurial at work so I need to have that).