Re: [E-devel] eo "design review"

So, I was, just like, remembering a trick I used in C++ for eina_log. And it hit me. We use eo_do because we need to run something _before_ and _after_ we call functions. Why don't we use a fake for loop? Let's say we do (simplified): #define eo_prepare(obj) \ for(struct _Eo_Object* __obj;

Re: [E-devel] eo "design review"

BTW, The trick was used in C++ to allow the following syntax: LOG(dbg) << "something to log " << 1 << " in a very C++ syntax" << " like"; On Sat, Nov 21, 2015 at 2:47 AM, Felipe Magno de Almeida wrote: > So, > > I was, just like, remembering a trick I used in C++

Re: [E-devel] eo "design review"

On Sun, 1 Nov 2015 22:22:47 -0200 Felipe Magno de Almeida said: > OK, > > So, I tried to take a stab at it during the weekend. > > I think all the optimizations are actually hurting performance. I > wanted to test removing eo_do and the whole machinery for stacks

Re: [E-devel] eo "design review"

On Wed, 4 Nov 2015 01:04:58 -0200 Felipe Magno de Almeida said: > On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 12:38 AM, Carsten Haitzler > wrote: > > On Sun, 1 Nov 2015 22:22:47 -0200 Felipe Magno de Almeida > > said: > > > >> OK, > >> >

Re: [E-devel] eo "design review"

On Wed, Nov 4, 2015 at 12:38 AM, Carsten Haitzler wrote: > On Sun, 1 Nov 2015 22:22:47 -0200 Felipe Magno de Almeida > said: > >> OK, >> >> So, I tried to take a stab at it during the weekend. >> >> I think all the optimizations are actually

Re: [E-devel] eo "design review"

On 02/11/15 09:03, Jean-Philippe André wrote: > Hi, > > Le lun. 2 nov. 2015 à 09:24, Felipe Magno de Almeida < > felipe.m.alme...@gmail.com> a écrit : > >> OK, >> >> So, I tried to take a stab at it during the weekend. >> >> I think all the optimizations are actually hurting performance. I >>

Re: [E-devel] eo "design review"

Hi, Le lun. 2 nov. 2015 à 09:24, Felipe Magno de Almeida < felipe.m.alme...@gmail.com> a écrit : > OK, > > So, I tried to take a stab at it during the weekend. > > I think all the optimizations are actually hurting performance. I > wanted to test removing eo_do and the whole machinery for stacks

Re: [E-devel] eo "design review"

OK, So, I tried to take a stab at it during the weekend. I think all the optimizations are actually hurting performance. I wanted to test removing eo_do and the whole machinery for stacks etc. And just use the _eo_obj_pointer_get. However, for some reason, mixins and composites stopped working

Re: [E-devel] eo "design review"

On Fri, 30 Oct 2015 18:13:49 + Tom Hacohen said: > On 25/10/15 03:05, Carsten Haitzler wrote: > > i've been spending a bit of time profiling eo. > > > > SETUP: > > > > here is my test. frankly this is a COMMON CASE test of scrolling genlist > > around. this is

Re: [E-devel] eo "design review"

On 25/10/15 03:05, Carsten Haitzler wrote: > i've been spending a bit of time profiling eo. > > SETUP: > > here is my test. frankly this is a COMMON CASE test of scrolling genlist > around. this is incredibly common, and if it's slow people notice. so here is > the case: > >export

Re: [E-devel] eo "design review"

On Sun, 25 Oct 2015 12:05:19 +0900 Carsten Haitzler (The Rasterman) wrote: > i think it's time we look at eo now not from a "oh but thats not > clean" perspective but "this is going to be faster" perspective. I agree with that, and give it a +1. I'm not up to speed on the

[E-devel] eo "design review"

i've been spending a bit of time profiling eo. SETUP: here is my test. frankly this is a COMMON CASE test of scrolling genlist around. this is incredibly common, and if it's slow people notice. so here is the case: export ELM_ENGINE=gl export ELM_TEST_AUTOBOUNCE=1 then every time: