[rrr_oh_man]

I cannot judge whether the methodology makes sense, but the numbers seem quite impressive for my manager brain:

> Readme.md

  For a RustBerlin meetup presentation I compared lazygit, tig and gitui by
  parsing the entire Linux git repository (which contains over 900k commits):


  |         | Time       | Memory (GB) | Binary (MB) | Freezes   | Crashes   |
  | ------- | ---------- | ----------- | ----------- | --------- | --------- |
  | gitui   | 24 s       | 0.17        | 1.4         | No        | No        |
  | lazygit | 57 s       | 2.6         | 16          | Yes       | Sometimes |
  | tig     | 4 m 20 s   | 1.3         | 0.6         | Sometimes | No        |

[fbdab103]

On the other hand, I do not work on a repository nearly the size of Linux. If you evaluate performance on a more modest project, is there a meaningfully human speed difference?

I will always take faster tools, but sometimes things are good enough.

[vrmiguel]

I found the memory gains to be more enticing than the performance improvements

[no_carrier]

Those memory figures relate to parsing the linux kernel repo, so the parent's question still remains, if it matters to the rest of us?