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