I think we are saying the same thing in different lingo. I am trying to say, you do not need to store it if you can have fast rescans.
Coming to memory usage, if you store the sizes of every file you need 400K * 8 bytes = ~3 MB.
Now `ncdu` uses ~60 MB and `nnn` uses ~3.5 MB. How do you justify that huge gap?
> but you're not being very honest with your claims
No, I am completely honest within the limits of my technical understanding. Your tool uses 57 MB extra which would be considerable on a Raspberry Pi model B. To an end user, it's not important how a tool shows the du of `/`, what's important is - is the tool reasonable or not? I don't know how `ncdu` manages the memory within, I took a snapshot of the memory usage at `/`.
In fact, now I have questions about your very first line beginning with `This looks incredibly cool` and then the comparisons of it with different utilities in negative light. (I must be a fool realizing it now, I should have seen it coming.)
Coming to memory usage, if you store the sizes of every file you need 400K * 8 bytes = ~3 MB.
Now `ncdu` uses ~60 MB and `nnn` uses ~3.5 MB. How do you justify that huge gap?
> but you're not being very honest with your claims
No, I am completely honest within the limits of my technical understanding. Your tool uses 57 MB extra which would be considerable on a Raspberry Pi model B. To an end user, it's not important how a tool shows the du of `/`, what's important is - is the tool reasonable or not? I don't know how `ncdu` manages the memory within, I took a snapshot of the memory usage at `/`.
In fact, now I have questions about your very first line beginning with `This looks incredibly cool` and then the comparisons of it with different utilities in negative light. (I must be a fool realizing it now, I should have seen it coming.)