-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Michael Stone wrote: | 5) Sugar is built on technologies that incentivize its developers to | recompute prior results which could be cached across boots.
Sugar was intended to write to disk absolutely as little as possible, and also to reboot as infrequently as possible. I will attempt to find references to these intentions from years ago. Regarding the majority of your points, I would say: Sugar has been, and continues to be, in a constant rush just to implement the desired functionality, regardless of efficiency. The question has long been "how can we code this as fast as possible", not "what is the ideal way to implement this". I think that is a good thing. I think we will need retain this mindset through 9.1, in order to finally deliver a Sugar that has the features required for usability. I hope that Sugar developers can spend 2009 focusing on efficiency, laziness/memoization/eagerness, and delayering. - --Ben -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2.0.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iEYEARECAAYFAkiGe9wACgkQUJT6e6HFtqRQlgCcD5u0UXpqr+tR5Yf7aeSFd6yy QHQAoJ72ZXy7+PCVF66av7BsMahd+VNz =IsWm -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- _______________________________________________ Sugar mailing list Sugar@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/sugar