mirror of
https://github.com/storytold/lightcraft.git
synced 2026-10-25 02:30:15 -06:00
Nathaniel LedfordandClaude Opus 5.5
540a281ccd
The scan asked the disk about every library photo in the folder: is its file there, and has it a sidecar under any of four names. On a network share each question is a round trip, and the scan had just listed the folder. Measured on a hard disk over SMB, for unchanged folders of 1,600 to 2,400 photos: 4.6 to 7.1 s of questions after a listing of 4 to 5 s. - The walk hands each folder's listing over (`walk::files_in_noting`: every entry's name and kind, hidden ones too, and whether that is all of them). The scan walks the folder once, then checks the photos beside the probing of new files. - `sync::Listing` answers "is it there" / "is it a file" where that holds on any file system: a name the folder lists is there; a plain ASCII name is not there when the folder was listed to its end, all its names are ASCII and none is that name in another case. Everything else is asked of the disk as before (a link, a name Windows reads another way, a folder that was not walked, and every name not listed in a folder that holds a name outside ASCII). Now under 0.05 s for those folders. Two things differ on purpose: a file the folder lists is there though it can't be opened by its path (a folder that may be listed but not searched, an over-long path), where such photos were listed as missing; and the answers are the folder as the walk saw it. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>