Igor Stasenko schrieb:
> 2009/2/10 David Röthlisberger <squ...@webcitas.ch>:
>>
>>> But again, there is no excuse in doing this each time you need a tree.
>>> Thanks to system notifier we have a ways to determine when category
>>> tree needs to be rebuilt, so it can be built once and stay cached
>>> until user add/remove/rename category.
>> yes, right. Packages are cached for a long time and also their classes and 
>> extended
>> classes. And now also the class cats per package, which is a small share 
>> though.
>> But it's good to cache iy anyway.
>>
> 
> Also, note, that you need only one instance of such tree in image .
> You don't have to build this tree over and over again for each browser
> window on screen :)

In a way, yes.
But then OB would basically do what the system itself should do, namely 
modeling 
packages. I would rather invest in a genuine package model in the system itself 
than 
let OB build its own persistent package model. A browser should by definition 
browse 
an existing model and not primarily create, maintain, and make persistently 
accessible a system's model. This would be like a shadow model to what the 
system 
otherwise uses, Sounds odd to me, although from a performance point of view it 
would 
make sense.

David

_______________________________________________
Pharo-project mailing list
Pharo-project@lists.gforge.inria.fr
http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

Reply via email to