At 1253017547 time_t, lukk...@email.cz wrote: > Except for less extendability (I think it is :) it brings speed.
Speed? Why do you want to bring speed? Is it currently slow? Speed for speed brings nothing. > I'm not sure if > you have any experience with lua speed in awesome, I just found this: > http://www.timestretch.com/FractalBenchmark.html > showing lua is about 30 times slower than C (the actual ratio in this case > may vary by as much as 50% IMHO). The layout function could be called > a lot (again I'm not sure how much though), its a bit long and with > complex layouts is called recursively.. and so it could have an > impact on slower mashines (and awesome is supposed to be > lightweight..). you don't think it could be an issue? No, I don't think so. Yes Lua is probably 30 times slower than C, but it's still damn fast. When things will get too slow for a proper usage on any modern computer (sorry, I don't target 75 MHz processor) we'll see. So far, the profiling we did never pointed out any point of slowness in Lua. We rather have speed issue with cairo being a bit slow to render things. And I trust *real usage profiling*. I don't trust special case benchmarking. > I'm not convinced :P (see my last mail, windows parented to root and those > parented to wibox both have quite different sets of properties) That's a different issue. What we do with windows is not X problem, but ours. And we'll find a clean and correct solution to handle such the design we are starting to implement. :) Cheers, -- Julien Danjou // ᐰ <jul...@danjou.info> http://julien.danjou.info // 9A0D 5FD9 EB42 22F6 8974 C95C A462 B51E C2FE E5CD // And thinking so much differently.
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature
