| Fair question! I didn't know a rust rewrite of autojump existed! I already benchmark pazi against autojump by itself, so adding in a benchmark against autojump-rs will basically be drop-in, and I do expect pazi will still be faster, but I'll see. At a glance, the differences I see are the following: * pazi has extensive integration tests and benchmark code * pazi doesn't fork processes into the background like autojump's shell scripts do (and therefore autojump-rs does), which avoids a few races * pazi's interactive selection (z -i) makes use of the terminal's alternate buffer to avoid blowing away your scrollback, which most jumpers don't bother with. * pazi has a cooler name in my opinion :) These differences are not all that major. pazi is definitely short on some features, and I don't blame you if you wish to use one of the others. I'll keep working on pazi because I like using it and I'm having fun working on it / optimizing it / testing it. |