On Jan 29, 2009, at 19:15 , Gary Chambers wrote:
> Well, a contemporary look will always drive the computer harder...
> Don't really find it a problem here though. Main PC is a
> 2.8MHzQuadCore, lappie is a 1.7MHz Centrino.
> Guess you might benefit from faster hardware.
>
> The SoftSqueak theme seems to be the fastest overall, curious since
> nicer looking than StandardSqueak (which is, essentially, a pass-
> through replication of the original code).
>
> I guess a poll of some kind of benchmark for all on the list may be
> in order...
We used to measure GUI performance with the "Browser-Bench":
time _ 0.
saveMorphs _ self currentWorld submorphs.
5 timesRepeat:[
self currentWorld removeAllMorphs. "heh, heh"
time _ time + (Time millisecondsToRun:
[
1 to: 10 do: [:i | Browser fullOnClass: SystemDictionary selector:
#abandonSources].
self currentWorld submorphs do: [:m | m delete. self currentWorld
doOneCycle]]).
].
self currentWorld addAllMorphs: saveMorphs.
time/5 asFloat "print it"
On my machine I get:
Squeak 3.9: 3800ms
Pharo #084: 2950ms
Pharo #213: 5200ms
#084 is before Polymorph was added and #213 is the most recent version.
BTW, with OB: 8590ms.
Cheers,
Adrian
>
>
> Thanks for the support.
>
> Regards, Gary.
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: Mariano Martinez Peck
> To: [email protected]
> Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2009 6:06 PM
> Subject: Re: [Pharo-project] Call for UI gripes
>
>
> Gary: First of all, thanks for your excellent work.
>
> I really like Polymorph and I use it as my default "theme". Very
> very impressive.
>
> However, squeak seems to be a bit slower with it. For example, in
> SqueakDBX we are 4 developers. Two of them cannot use it because is
> slower enough to loose their patient.
>
> I am still newbie in squeak so I really don't know the resasons of
> this. Perhaps this is a morphic thing and nothing about Polymorph.
> If this is the case, sorry.
>
> Please, continue with your work. I really enjoy Polymorph and happy
> to be the default in pharo.
>
> Cheers,
>
> Mariano
>
>
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 2:56 PM, Gary Chambers <[email protected]
> > wrote:
>
> Anything that anyone thinks could be improved?
> Happy to consider things... just would be nice to have a central
> point for
> moving forward with Polymorph (in particular) or other tools...
>
> There is a possibility of open-source release of the
> PackageListTool
>
> (http://www.flickr.com/photos/12018...@n06/2616669616/in/set-72157601659393251/
>
> )
> if there is any interest.
>
> Regards, Gary.
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [email protected]
>
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project_______________________________________________
> Pharo-project mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
