Re: LuaRocks search should use not luasec

[Dirk Laurie <dirk.laurie@...>]

Op Di., 11 Sep. 2018 om 09:29 het Pierre Chapuis <catwell@archlinux.us> geskryf:
>
> On Mon, Sep 10, 2018, at 20:17, Dirk Laurie wrote:
>
> > It's actually a direct way of saying "LuaRocks search should use not luasec".
> > I.e. not only should it not warn, it should not even test whether luasec is
> > available. We're not transmitting any secrets or downloading any packages,
> > it's just a search.
>
> This does not make much sense to me. External downloaders like wget
> use HTTPS too. If LuaSec is slower, it's not because of the extra security.
>
> If there is a performance issue with LuaSec it looks like a bug which
> should be reported properly...

I'm sorry, but I am not a LuaSec user. I have already removed that rock.

Anyway, I am not sure it is a bug to be 4-5 times slower than wget.
Quite a few things are that much slower via Lua than directly in C.

luacurl, which I use, is also slower than wget, but if the server's
API is sophisticated enough, you can get by with just a couple of
accesses. The problem arises when you are trying to conduct a
conversation with dozens of messages purely in URLs. As Sean said:
"expensive network queries" dominate the elapsed time.