On a late 2009 27 iMac (2.66 GHz i5), 10.9.3
Make the window full screen: 100.15
Full screen, no menu bar, dock: 71.27
While running a hangout session,
and having about half a dozen other applications open.
Is there buffering below this?
Is there a difference when doing
Display
Darrin Massena wrote:
If nobody has time to curate the information then an
issue tracker is probably the way to go. At least then tidbits of
information would be gathered in one stream with timestamps so one can
gauge relevance. For example, I'm doing some performance measurements
and would
Hi Darrin,
The other thing you can use is World Tools Time Profiler. Put
the code in the top pane (dropping the Transcript and
milliSecondsToRun: lines). Here are my results (with loop:=1000)
On Windows 7...
2233 tallies, 2237 msec.
93.0% {2081ms} SmallInteger(Integer)timesRepeat:
6.9%
Hi Darrin,
Quoting darrinm dar...@massena.com:
You get a Cuis image and it's super fast.
What machine are you running on? I just gave the 2009 image of Cuis a try on
my current-model Mac Pro (3.6 GHz, 6 cores, tons of RAM) and honestly just
dragging a window around was terribly slow. Just
Hi Esteban,
Quoting Esteban A. Maringolo emaring...@gmail.com:
I couldn't tell exactly, I haven't used Cuis in the last year or so,
but at that time (Pharo 2 was new) it was the faster of the three
brothers (Pharo/Squeak/Cuis).
Maybe that changed lately and Cuis got slower too. Apparently it
It depends what you measure.
If you measure classBrowser opening then nautilus is slower because it
is doing more stuff.
Now we invested a lot in
- cleaning morphic and we will continue. We fixed broken rectangles
(around 150 creation), added Margin to avoid ifTrue:
removed many of
2014-06-02 16:51 GMT-03:00 stepharo steph...@free.fr:
It depends what you measure.
If you measure classBrowser opening then nautilus is slower because it is
doing more stuff.
If adding more features degrades performance in a human perceivable
way then it's slowing down. (I mean, if slowdown is
I'm learning and would love to hear ideas about how best to benchmark
Smalltalk rendering. I tried this very crude test in a Workspace:
loops := 100.
rect := Display boundingBox.
a := Time millisecondsToRun: [
loops timesRepeat: [
Display forceToScreen: rect.
].
].
Transcript show: a / loops
Like this https://pharo.fogbugz.com/default.asp?spec ?
Le 01/06/2014 00:23, Camille Teruel a écrit :
I once set up several discussion topics there but nobody filled them yet.
--
Dr. Geo http://drgeo.eu
On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 4:13 AM, kilon alios kilon.al...@gmail.com wrote:
Its not about having issues or not having issues, its about how much
performance you consume for the GUI alone.
I have installed both CPU performance monitor for 2.0GHZ Core2Duo iMac and
my new i5 3.2 Ghz iMac. Moving
If nobody has time to curate the information then an issue tracker is
probably the way to go. At least then tidbits of information would be
gathered in one stream with timestamps so one can gauge relevance. For
example, I'm doing some performance measurements and would post them to a
GUI
2014-06-01 14:44 GMT-03:00 Darrin Massena dar...@massena.com:
Today's machines are thousands of times faster than the ones Smalltalk
originally ran on. How much faster is its UI now? I don't think Moore's Law
is going to fix the problem.
It has ups and downs, if you get a Squeak 3.8 image and
You get a Cuis image and it's super fast.
What machine are you running on? I just gave the 2009 image of Cuis a try on
my current-model Mac Pro (3.6 GHz, 6 cores, tons of RAM) and honestly just
dragging a window around was terribly slow. Just guessing, I'd say 10 FPS or
less which probably half
I couldn't tell exactly, I haven't used Cuis in the last year or so,
but at that time (Pharo 2 was new) it was the faster of the three
brothers (Pharo/Squeak/Cuis).
Maybe that changed lately and Cuis got slower too. Apparently it is
very easy to bloat Morphic.
Regards,
Esteban A. Maringolo
Yes. Reading what Juan Vuletich is working on for the next Morphic there is
a lot said about things I imagine would negatively impact performance if a
lot of deliberate effort isn't made to offset them.
On Sun, Jun 1, 2014 at 5:12 PM, Esteban A. Maringolo emaring...@gmail.com
wrote:
I couldn't
I don't know how long will it take to revamp Morphic, last time I saw
a demo of it at Smalltalks conference (~circa 2007/8), it was really
promising, but didn't hear about it again.
Regards,
Esteban A. Maringolo
2014-06-01 21:24 GMT-03:00 Darrin Massena dar...@massena.com:
Yes. Reading what
Esteban A. Maringolo wrote:
I don't know how long will it take to revamp Morphic, last time I saw
a demo of it at Smalltalks conference (~circa 2007/8), it was really
promising, but didn't hear about it again.
Regards,
Esteban A. Maringolo
It seems Juan was concerned about his new
Would be good that this guy posts here
because I do not have this slack on my machine.
darrinm wrote
On my Mac, Pharo's UI performance (e.g. window dragging, scrolling, any
kind of animation) is quite a bit less than the rest of the system. I
expect high frame rates for such basic things. It
2014-05-31 8:12 GMT+02:00 stepharo steph...@free.fr:
Would be good that this guy posts here
because I do not have this slack on my machine.
darrinm wrote
On my Mac, Pharo's UI performance (e.g. window dragging, scrolling, any
kind of animation) is quite a bit less than the rest of the
We could try to organize a task force on that matter. I will try to
submit some proposals later, but now I want to prepare a delicious cake.
Hilaire
Le 31/05/2014 10:48, Clément Bera a écrit :
The second thing is that BitBlt is slow for 2 reasons: it is bit based
and not vector based and its
On Sat, May 31, 2014 at 11:33 AM, Hilaire Fernandes
hilaire.fernan...@gmail.com wrote:
We could try to organize a task force on that matter. I will try to
submit some proposals later, but now I want to prepare a delicious cake.
Ha, cool. I am cleaning the home :-)
Jokes aside, it is true
Its not about having issues or not having issues, its about how much
performance you consume for the GUI alone.
I have installed both CPU performance monitor for 2.0GHZ Core2Duo iMac and
my new i5 3.2 Ghz iMac. Moving a system browser window in the old iMac
spikes the CPUs to 50-70% while moving
I would like to try (again) a wiki for Pharo.
Problem is that they obsolete very fast, and information there become unusable…
I suppose we need a “wiki overseer” (or several) to ensure we keep it in track…
anyway, I want to try a wiki for Pharo, because there is a lot of information
that fits
Hello,
Typically for a new contribution, one write a new task in the bugtracker
and then fix it (here: https://pharo.fogbugz.com/).
The 2 issues I mentioned, Morphic and BitBlt performance are well-known
issues in the Pharo team. Some projects have been started to solve these
issues: a
I know the points you described but my point was really it could help --
as Esteban rephrased it -- if we have a place to write down
stuff/idea/things to do/technical info related to Pharo improvement. It
is helpful to point someone to as a starting point.
PS: As far as I knwo Cairo is only
On 31 mai 2014, at 20:21, Hilaire Fernandes hilaire.fernan...@gmail.com wrote:
I know the points you described but my point was really it could help --
as Esteban rephrased it -- if we have a place to write down
stuff/idea/things to do/technical info related to Pharo improvement. It
is
darrinm wrote
On my Mac, Pharo's UI performance (e.g. window dragging, scrolling, any
kind of animation) is quite a bit less than the rest of the system. I
expect high frame rates for such basic things. It impacts everything I do
and makes me sad.
I'm still learning and would like to know:
27 matches
Mail list logo
