May 2009 - Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-project] I always thought that 1 to: 100 do: was faster than (1 to: 100) do:

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

but nicolas this is quite strange I unset the preference and I get 1 to: 1000 -> 3405 ms (1 to: 1000) -> 2600 ms I'm puzzled. Should probably increase the sample.... I redid the experience with exaclty the same setup and I get 26115 vs 25487 so this should be ok Stef On May 3, 2009, at 9:25 PM, Nicolas Cellier wrote: > I bet it's undo history again! > > reverse the order of the two tests and redo... > or deselect the preference for multipletextUndo. > > 2009/5/3 StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr>: >>> >>> >>> but apparently >>> http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=750 >>> shows the contrary and this is really strange. I think that may be >>> this is a slow down in Transcript but... >>> >>> Stef >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >

May 3, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] Monticello/ftp stopped working for me

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

tx!!!!

May 3, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] transcript slowed down by closure rollback?

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

Strange I cannot reproduce my benchmarh behavior. May be I had two transcript open, would be idiot but why not. in 10297 MessageTally spyOn: [1 to: 1000 do: [:i | Transcript show: i printString ;cr]] -> 1934 ms and in 10195 -> 1850 now with [....] timeToRun I get 2434 ms in 10297 and 2123 in 10195 But I do not now have TextMorphCommandHistory referenced at all Something like that - 1831 tallies, 1831 msec. **Tree** 100.0% {1831ms} TranscriptStream>>show: 100.0% {1831ms} TranscriptStream>>endEntry 99.8% {1827ms} TranscriptStream(Object)>>changed: 99.8% {1827ms} PluggableTextMorph>>update: 54.7% {1002ms} PluggableTextMorph>>handleEdit: |41.5% {760ms} TextMorphForEditView(TextMorph)>>handleEdit: | |37.1% {679ms} TextMorphForEditView>>updateFromParagraph | | |29.8% {546ms} PluggableTextMorph(ScrollPane)>>setScrollDeltas | | | |15.9% {291ms} PluggableTextMorph(ScrollPane)>>hideOrShowScrollBars | | | | |7.2% {132ms} PluggableTextMorph(ScrollPane)>>resizeScrollBars | | | | | |4.8% {88ms} PluggableTextMorph(ScrollPane)>>hResizeScrollBar | | | | | | |3.7% {68ms} PluggableTextMorph(ScrollPane)>>hScrollBarWidth | | | | | | | 3.1% {57ms} PluggableTextMorph(ScrollPane)>>vIsScrollbarNeeded | | | | | | | 3.1% {57ms} PluggableTextMorph(ScrollPane)>>vIsScrollable | | | | | | | 2.7% {49ms} PluggableTextMorph(ScrollPane)>>vLeftoverScrollRange | | | | | | | 2.1% {38ms} PluggableTextMorph(ScrollPane)>>vScrollBarHeight | | | | | | | 2.1% {38ms} PluggableTextMorph(ScrollPane)>>hIsScrollbarNeeded | | | | | |2.3% {42ms} PluggableTextMorph(ScrollPane)>>vResizeScrollBar | | | | |4.5% {82ms} PluggableTextMorph(ScrollPane)>>vHideOrShowScrollBar | | | | | |4.1% {75ms} PluggableTextMorph(ScrollPane)>>vIsScrollbarNeeded | | | | | | 3.7% {68ms} PluggableTextMorph(ScrollPane)>>vIsScrollable | | | | | | 3.1% {57ms} PluggableTextMorph(ScrollPane)>>vLeftoverScrollRange | | | | | | 2.2% {40ms} PluggableTextMorph(ScrollPane)>>vScrollBarHeight | | | | | | 2.2% {40ms} PluggableTextMorph(ScrollPane)>>hIsScrollbarNeeded | | | | |3.9% {71ms} PluggableTextMorph(ScrollPane)>>hHideOrShowScrollBar | | | | | 2.2% {40ms} PluggableTextMorph(ScrollPane)>>hHideScrollBar | | | |13.7% {251ms} PluggableTextMorph(ScrollPane)>>vSetScrollDelta | | | | 6.1% {112ms} ScrollBar>>setValue: | | | | |6.1% {112ms} ScrollBar(Slider)>>setValue: | | | | | 4.9% {90ms} PluggableTextMorph(ScrollPane)>>vScrollBarValue: | | | | | 2.5% {46ms} PluggableTextMorph(ScrollPane)>>vLeftoverScrollRange | | | | | 2.2% {40ms} TransformMorph>>offset: | | | | 2.8% {51ms} PluggableTextMorph(ScrollPane)>>vLeftoverScrollRange | | | | 2.2% {40ms} PluggableTextMorph(ScrollPane)>>vScrollBarHeight | | | | 2.1% {38ms} PluggableTextMorph(ScrollPane)>>hIsScrollbarNeeded | | |7.4% {135ms} TextMorphForEditView(TextMorph)>>updateFromParagraph | | | 6.8% {125ms} TextMorphForEditView(TextMorph)>>fit | | | 4.4% {81ms} TextMorphForEditView(Morph)>>extent: | | | |4.0% {73ms} TextMorphForEditView(Morph)>>changed | | | | 3.9% {71ms} TextMorphForEditView(Morph)>>invalidRect: | | | | 3.9% {71ms} TextMorphForEditView(Morph)>>invalidRect:from: | | | | 3.9% {71ms} TransformMorph>>invalidRect:from: | | | | 2.2% {40ms} TransformMorph(Morph)>>invalidRect:from: | | | 2.2% {40ms} TextMorphForEditView(Morph)>>changed | | | 2.2% {40ms} TextMorphForEditView(Morph)>>invalidRect: | | | 2.1% {38ms} TextMorphForEditView(Morph)>>invalidRect:from: | | | 2.1% {38ms} TransformMorph>>invalidRect:from: | |4.4% {81ms} TextMorphForEditView(TextMorph)>>selectionChanged | | 3.7% {68ms} TextMorphForEditView(Morph)>>invalidRect: | | 3.7% {68ms} TextMorphForEditView(Morph)>>invalidRect:from: | | 3.7% {68ms} TransformMorph>>invalidRect:from: |9.8% {179ms} PluggableTextMorph>>scrollSelectionIntoView | |9.8% {179ms} PluggableTextMorph>>scrollSelectionIntoView: | | 8.1% {148ms} PluggableTextMorph(ScrollPane)>>scrollBy: | | 2.7% {49ms} TransformMorph>>offset: | | |2.5% {46ms} TransformMorph(Morph)>>changed | | 2.4% {44ms} PluggableTextMorph(ScrollPane)>>vLeftoverScrollRange |3.4% {62ms} TextMorphEditor>>selectFrom:to: | 2.8% {51ms} TextMorphEditor(ParagraphEditor)>>selectInvisiblyFrom:to: | 2.8% {51ms} TextMorphEditor(ParagraphEditor)>>computeIntervalFrom:to: 45.0% {824ms} PluggableTextMorph>>appendEntry 39.7% {727ms} PluggableTextMorph>>replaceSelectionWith: |39.7% {727ms} TextMorphEditor(ParagraphEditor)>>replaceSelectionWith: | 39.5% {723ms} TextMorphEditor>>zapSelectionWith: | 27.7% {507ms} MultiNewParagraph(NewParagraph)>>replaceFrom:to:with:displaying: | |27.0% {494ms} MultiNewParagraph(NewParagraph)>>recomposeFrom:to:delta: | | 12.3% {225ms} MultiNewParagraph (NewParagraph)>>composeLinesFrom:to:delta:into:priorLines:atY: | | |12.3% {225ms} TextComposer>>composeLinesFrom:to:del...ner:wantsColumnBreaks: | | | 8.1% {148ms} OrderedCollection(SequenceableCollection)>>asArray | | | |8.1% {148ms} Array class(ArrayedCollection class)>>withAll: | | | | 8.1% {148ms} Array(SequenceableCollection)>>replaceFrom:to:with: | | | | 8.0% {146ms} Array>>replaceFrom:to:with:startingAt: | | | | 8.0% {146ms} Array(SequenceableCollection)>>replaceFrom:to:with:startingAt: | | | | 4.0% {73ms} OrderedCollection>>at: | | | | 4.0% {73ms} primitives | | | 4.2% {77ms} TextComposer>>composeAllLines | | | 4.1% {75ms} TextComposer>>composeOneLine | | | 3.8% {70ms} TextComposer>>composeAllRectangles: | | | 3.4% {62ms} TextComposer>>composeEachRectangleIn: | | | 3.2% {59ms} CompositionScanner>>composeFrom:inRectan...leftSide:rightSide: | | 9.1% {167ms} OrderedCollection>>addLast: | | |6.1% {112ms} primitives | | |3.0% {55ms} OrderedCollection>>makeRoomAtLast | | 5.5% {101ms} primitives | 8.6% {157ms} TextMorphEditor>>addEditCommand: | |8.6% {157ms} TextMorphCommandHistory>>rememberCommand: | | 8.5% {156ms} TextMorphCommandHistory>>removeUndoneCommands | | 8.4% {154ms} OrderedCollection>>reversed | | 4.4% {81ms} OrderedCollection>>addLast: | | |4.0% {73ms} primitives | | 3.9% {71ms} OrderedCollection>>reverseDo: | 2.3% {42ms} TextMorphEditor(ParagraphEditor)>>computeIntervalFrom:to: 5.2% {95ms} PluggableTextMorph>>selectInvisiblyFrom:to: 5.2% {95ms} TextMorphEditor(ParagraphEditor)>>selectInvisiblyFrom:to: 5.2% {95ms} TextMorphEditor(ParagraphEditor)>>computeIntervalFrom:to: 2.6% {48ms} TextMorphEditor(ParagraphEditor)>>setMark: |2.5% {46ms} MultiNewParagraph(NewParagraph)>>characterBlockForIndex: | 2.2% {40ms} CharacterBlockScanner>>characterBlockAtPoint:index:in: 2.5% {46ms} TextMorphEditor(ParagraphEditor)>>setPoint: 2.4% {44ms} MultiNewParagraph(NewParagraph)>>characterBlockForIndex: 2.1% {38ms} CharacterBlockScanner>>characterBlockAtPoint:index:in: **Leaves** 10.1% {185ms} OrderedCollection>>addLast: 5.5% {101ms} MultiNewParagraph(NewParagraph)>>recomposeFrom:to:delta: 4.0% {73ms} OrderedCollection>>at: 4.0% {73ms} Array(SequenceableCollection)>>replaceFrom:to:with:startingAt: 3.9% {71ms} OrderedCollection>>reverseDo: 3.3% {60ms} SmallIdentityDictionary>>findIndexFor: 3.1% {57ms} OrderedCollection>>makeRoomAtLast 2.5% {46ms} Rectangle>>setOrigin:corner: 2.2% {40ms} Rectangle class>>origin:corner: **Memory** old +494,828 bytes young +79,176 bytes used +574,004 bytes free -574,004 bytes **GCs** full 0 totalling 0ms (0.0% uptime) incr 627 totalling 95ms (5.0% uptime), avg 0.0ms tenures 11 (avg 57 GCs/tenure) root table 0 overflows

May 3, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] I always thought that 1 to: 100 do: was faster than (1 to: 100) do:

by Igor Stasenko

2009/5/3 HernÃ¡n Morales Durand <hernan.morales(a)gmail.com>: > Â Igor, you're claiming that every reference to Transcript in every > package and every example should be wrapped in some way by > > [ ... Â ] forkAt: Processor userBackgroundPriority. > > to preserve the historical behavior ? > No, i'm not. It is the Transcript which ensuring the thread-safety. Transcript is a stream. It could be used w/o being connected to a window. Please make difference between Transcript stream, which is updated immediately, and Transcript window which can be updated when it is safe to do it. > 2009/5/3 Igor Stasenko <siguctua(a)gmail.com>: >> 2009/5/3 StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr>: >>>> >>>> >>>> but apparently >>>> Â Â Â http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=750 >>>> shows the contrary and this is really strange. I think that may be >>>> this is a slow down in Transcript but... >>>> >> >> i added a comment to this issue. >> >>>> Stef >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Best regards, >> Igor Stasenko AKA sig. >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

May 3, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] transcript slowed down by closure rollback?

by StÃ©phane Ducasse

On May 3, 2009, at 9:18 PM, Igor Stasenko wrote: > 2009/5/3 StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr>: >> Still even with your speedup loaded I get 6534 ms in 10296cl :( >> > Is transcript using the old TextMorph, or its using a Shout text > morph. > It can be possible that its using a different route for updating a > window contents, so given fix simply doesn't affects it. > > Try debug Transcript show:, and see if its trying to update the morph > immediately. My change were for TextMorph to not update contents > immediately but rather on regular World update cycle. Yes I saw that. But apparently the fix or its spirit) was already in: there is no refreshWorld anymore Stef

May 3, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] I always thought that 1 to: 100 do: was faster than (1 to: 100) do:

by HernÃ¡n Morales Durand

Igor, you're claiming that every reference to Transcript in every package and every example should be wrapped in some way by [ ... ] forkAt: Processor userBackgroundPriority. to preserve the historical behavior ? 2009/5/3 Igor Stasenko <siguctua(a)gmail.com>: > 2009/5/3 StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr>: >>> >>> >>> but apparently >>> Â Â Â http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=750 >>> shows the contrary and this is really strange. I think that may be >>> this is a slow down in Transcript but... >>> > > i added a comment to this issue. > >>> Stef >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > > > > -- > Best regards, > Igor Stasenko AKA sig. > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project

May 3, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] Monticello/ftp stopped working for me

by Igor Stasenko

2009/5/3 StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr>: > igor > > do you have a pointer on ephemerons because I forgot the details > and these details are important. > Please read that nabble thread (http://www.nabble.com/An-idea-about-better-finalization-support-td23186805.…) , there are multiple pointers to ephemerons, like http://map.squeak.org/package/fe2a35f5-3f97-431e-8596-58e810aa3c72 which briefly describes what makes ephemeron's essential comparing to regular weak references. > stef > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

May 3, 2009

[Pharo-project] A fun issue with Debugger

by Igor Stasenko

Open a workspace, type: 1 then open menu and pick debug-it. You wont be able to do anything else until press the interrupt key. It applies to both 3.10.2. and Pharo with closures. -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

May 3, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] I always thought that 1 to: 100 do: was faster than (1 to: 100) do:

by Igor Stasenko

2009/5/3 StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr>: >> >> >> but apparently >> Â Â Â http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=750 >> shows the contrary and this is really strange. I think that may be >> this is a slow down in Transcript but... >> i added a comment to this issue. >> Stef >> >> >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > -- Best regards, Igor Stasenko AKA sig.

May 3, 2009

Re: [Pharo-project] I always thought that 1 to: 100 do: was faster than (1 to: 100) do:

by Nicolas Cellier

I bet it's undo history again! reverse the order of the two tests and redo... or deselect the preference for multipletextUndo. 2009/5/3 StÃ©phane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr>: >> >> >> but apparently >> http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=750 >> shows the contrary and this is really strange. I think that may be >> this is a slow down in Transcript but... >> >> Stef >> >> >> >> > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > Pharo-project(a)lists.gforge.inria.fr > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >

May 3, 2009