gtg-contributors team mailing list archive

[Bertrand Rousseau <bertrand.rousseau@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Sat, May 29, 2010 at 5:27 PM, Lionel Dricot <ploum@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hello Luca,
>
> That's a very interesting question. It is possible (not sure) that it is
> an historical decision.
>
> Your idea to refactorize that is a very good one.
>
> We also somewhat use the current callback to not oversync during
> launch : we set the callback at the end so it cannot be called at the
> beginning.
>
> But it's straightforward to do the same with signals. In fact, I think
> that signals are a lot more powerful for that kind of stuffs.

And I think it also brings a clearer model of interaction between GTG objects.

>
>>  - if a task changes its tags (and thus should be stored in a different
>>    backend) we have to change the sync function
>
> That point doesn't seem to be a problem. You have to change the uid
> anyway. So why not the sync function ?
>
>
>> It seems to be a bit faster than the current implementation (the trunk
>> 39 seconds to load 1000 tasks is cut down to 25), but my test are really
>
>
> That's an huge improvement ! That fact alone should convince us :-)

Yes, that's almost 40%... kind of nice for something "a bit" faster ;-)

>
>
> Lionel
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~gtg-contributors
> Post to     : gtg-contributors@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~gtg-contributors
> More help   : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
>



-- 
Bertrand Rousseau