portindex ignores (filters out) unchanged port

[René J.V. Bertin]

On Monday December 28 2015 15:42:46 Rainer Müller wrote:

>I don't understand your argument at all. In a list of ports that all
>have the same prefix it is as easy to find something alphabetically as
>it is in a list without the prefix.

No it isn't, unless you're a computer that isn't subject to the usual cognitive processes biological systems are governed by.
It's about "not being able to see the forest through all the trees" and "finding a needle in a haystack" .

That is not to say that we're all equally affected, but affected we are.

>
>There is a technical
>reason you have to use the exact same name for the port directory and in
>the Portfile.
> I do not see any other solution for this with the current PortIndex.

The whole discussion is related to the idea of evolving the port indexing mechanism. Assuming the portfile is parsed when it has to be (re)indexed, there will only be a minor cost to calculating a hash and use that for future evaluation to know if reindexing is required.


R.