- Pharo-dev - lists.pharo.org

Re: [Pharo-project] Wrong number with message tally?

by Levente Uzonyi

On Fri, 23 Dec 2011, Nicolas Cellier wrote: > Doesn't it tally several processes ? (finalization etc...) No, that would be MessageTally spyAllOn: [ ... ]. Levente > > Nicolas > > 2011/12/23 Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel(a)me.com>: >> Hi! >> >> MessageTally seems to give wrong values regarding the relative time spent. Consider: >> Â Â Â Â MessageTally spyOn: [ Â 100 timesRepeat: [ 1000 factorial ] ] >> >> It gives something like: >> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= >> Â - 377 tallies, 379 msec. >> >> **Tree** >> -------------------------------- >> Process: (40s) Â 464519168: nil >> -------------------------------- >> 65.8% {249ms} SmallInteger(Integer)>>factorial >> Â 65.8% {249ms} SmallInteger(Integer)>>factorial >> Â Â 65.8% {249ms} SmallInteger(Integer)>>factorial >> Â Â Â 65.8% {249ms} SmallInteger(Integer)>>factorial >> ... >> -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= >> >> I would expect to have 100% at the root of the call graph since other threads are not reported. >> >> Is there something I am missing? If no, then I will dive into MessageTally. This is annoying. >> >> Cheers, >> Alexandre >> >> -- >> _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: >> Alexandre Bergel Â http://www.bergel.eu >> ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. >> >> >> >> >> >> > >

Dec. 23, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Wrong number with message tally?

by Levente Uzonyi

On Fri, 23 Dec 2011, Alexandre Bergel wrote: > Hi! > > MessageTally seems to give wrong values regarding the relative time spent. Consider: > MessageTally spyOn: [ 100 timesRepeat: [ 1000 factorial ] ] > > It gives something like: > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= > - 377 tallies, 379 msec. > > **Tree** > -------------------------------- > Process: (40s) 464519168: nil > -------------------------------- > 65.8% {249ms} SmallInteger(Integer)>>factorial > 65.8% {249ms} SmallInteger(Integer)>>factorial > 65.8% {249ms} SmallInteger(Integer)>>factorial > 65.8% {249ms} SmallInteger(Integer)>>factorial > ... > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= > > I would expect to have 100% at the root of the call graph since other threads are not reported. > > Is there something I am missing? If no, then I will dive into MessageTally. This is annoying. This means that some other process (probably the finalization process, since #factorial creates a lot of garbage) was running and/or gc happened during the "missing" 34.2%. The gc times are listed below. Levente > > Cheers, > Alexandre > > -- > _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: > Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu > ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. > > > > > > >

Dec. 23, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Wrong number with message tally?

by Nicolas Cellier

Doesn't it tally several processes ? (finalization etc...) Nicolas 2011/12/23 Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel(a)me.com>: > Hi! > > MessageTally seems to give wrong values regarding the relative time spent. Consider: > Â Â Â Â MessageTally spyOn: [ Â 100 timesRepeat: [ 1000 factorial ] ] > > It gives something like: > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= > Â - 377 tallies, 379 msec. > > **Tree** > -------------------------------- > Process: (40s) Â 464519168: nil > -------------------------------- > 65.8% {249ms} SmallInteger(Integer)>>factorial > Â 65.8% {249ms} SmallInteger(Integer)>>factorial > Â Â 65.8% {249ms} SmallInteger(Integer)>>factorial > Â Â Â 65.8% {249ms} SmallInteger(Integer)>>factorial > ... > -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= > > I would expect to have 100% at the root of the call graph since other threads are not reported. > > Is there something I am missing? If no, then I will dive into MessageTally. This is annoying. > > Cheers, > Alexandre > > -- > _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: > Alexandre Bergel Â http://www.bergel.eu > ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. > > > > > >

Dec. 23, 2011

[Pharo-project] Wrong number with message tally?

by Alexandre Bergel

Hi! MessageTally seems to give wrong values regarding the relative time spent. Consider: MessageTally spyOn: [ 100 timesRepeat: [ 1000 factorial ] ] It gives something like: -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= - 377 tallies, 379 msec. **Tree** -------------------------------- Process: (40s) 464519168: nil -------------------------------- 65.8% {249ms} SmallInteger(Integer)>>factorial 65.8% {249ms} SmallInteger(Integer)>>factorial 65.8% {249ms} SmallInteger(Integer)>>factorial 65.8% {249ms} SmallInteger(Integer)>>factorial ... -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-= I would expect to have 100% at the root of the call graph since other threads are not reported. Is there something I am missing? If no, then I will dive into MessageTally. This is annoying. Cheers, Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.

Dec. 23, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] gtinspector

by Mariano Martinez Peck

On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 3:30 PM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel(a)me.com>wrote: > > I don't agree. If I just want to install GTInspector, why should I > download lots of dependencies which actually are NOT dependencies?? I just > want to download GTInspector and only its REAL dependencies, that is, the > dependencies I need to make it work. Even if the loading would be fast, I > DON'T WANT dependencies that are not dependencies. At least in this > scenario. Some may want them, some may not. So, having a way to load > GTInspector and only its real dependencies is something I would appreciate. > > If only the speed were the problem, I can load whole moose in something > like 10 seconds using fuel. > > I am probably less sensible on this issue. On my computer I have thousands > of files that I do not know what they are useful for. I simply do not look > at them :-) > But: - you don't search senders, implementors, browser, do refactorings, etc in your machine. Just for a simple inspector I end up with my image full of stuff which I don't usually want (if I do want, then I would explicitly load the rest). - it doesn't fail when there are problems with their dependencies (as it happens with Moose when having lots of dependencies) - you do not install the same software that much. I do. I build new images all the time. All in all, what I want to say is that if there are users (like me) which would like to load GTInspector only load the needed dependencies, then it would be good if you can provide them. Cheers > > Alexandre > > -- > _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: > Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu > ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. > > > > > > > -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com

Dec. 23, 2011

[Pharo-project] TextLint usage for German text?

by Franz Josef Konrad

Has somebody used TextLint to analyze German Text? I haven't found any hint in this direction. If there is no adaption for German available, do you think it can be done easily? I had a short look to the source code and saw that one of the key points of TextLint is to recognize the type of a word (noun, verb, etc.). This is done by building a dictionary of words that comes from the English Wiktionary. From a first and naive view I would guess this can be done also for German and the rules could be adopt to German styling rules. Any remark to this topic is appreciated. Btw, I would like to use TextLint for analysing text of user manuals. Regards, Franz Josef

Dec. 23, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] gtinspector

by Alexandre Bergel

> I don't agree. If I just want to install GTInspector, why should I download lots of dependencies which actually are NOT dependencies?? I just want to download GTInspector and only its REAL dependencies, that is, the dependencies I need to make it work. Even if the loading would be fast, I DON'T WANT dependencies that are not dependencies. At least in this scenario. Some may want them, some may not. So, having a way to load GTInspector and only its real dependencies is something I would appreciate. > If only the speed were the problem, I can load whole moose in something like 10 seconds using fuel. I am probably less sensible on this issue. On my computer I have thousands of files that I do not know what they are useful for. I simply do not look at them :-) Alexandre -- _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;.

Dec. 23, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] gtinspector

by Mariano Martinez Peck

On Fri, Dec 23, 2011 at 1:48 PM, Alexandre Bergel <alexandre.bergel(a)me.com>wrote: > > Just to clarify: Most of the Glamour dependencies that are loaded by > default are due to extra support like EyeSee, Mondrian and Magritte. If > people do not want these, they do not have to be loaded. For example, to > load just the basic Glamour, you can load it like: > > (ConfigurationOfGlamour project version: 'default') load: {'Core'. > 'Morphic'} > > The problem of dependencies is not their presence, but the time taken to > load them. > Removing EyeSee, Mondrian and Magritte from Glamour will not make Glamour > better. However, having a smart cache mechanism on top of Metacello will > definitely make all us happy. > > Having one single .mcz file to load instead for the whole version would be > great. This should not be done by removing dependencies. > I don't agree. If I just want to install GTInspector, why should I download lots of dependencies which actually are NOT dependencies?? I just want to download GTInspector and only its REAL dependencies, that is, the dependencies I need to make it work. Even if the loading would be fast, I DON'T WANT dependencies that are not dependencies. At least in this scenario. Some may want them, some may not. So, having a way to load GTInspector and only its real dependencies is something I would appreciate. If only the speed were the problem, I can load whole moose in something like 10 seconds using fuel. > > Cheers, > Alexandre > > -- > _,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;: > Alexandre Bergel http://www.bergel.eu > ^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;._,.;:~^~:;. > > > > > > > -- Mariano http://marianopeck.wordpress.com

Dec. 23, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] gtinspector

by Sean P. DeNigris

Tudor Girba-2 wrote > > Yes. It will load: Glamour (which loads Mondrian, EyeSee, Magritte and > some of its unnecessary dependencies :)) Is it possible to load the toolkit on top of basic Glamour (w/o Mondrian, EyeSee, Magritte...)? -- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/gtinspector-tp4220848p4228581.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Dec. 23, 2011

Re: [Pharo-project] Newbie observations on use of Metacello

by Ben Coman

Igor Stasenko wrote: > i'd like to comment the parts i like (not all) :) > >> Based on the above points, it would be nice to have... >> >> a> Metacello configuration: 'SqueakDBX' load >> >> rather than... >> >> b> Gofer new >> b> squeaksource: 'MetacelloRepository'; >> b> package: 'ConfigurationOfSqueakDBX'; >> b> load. >> b> ConfigurationOfSqueakDBX project latestVersion load. > yes , that would be nice. except from one thing: your image must have metacello installed. While things is done in a way, that you don't need to have it in order to load a project from your configuration. i.e. one can load ConfigurationOfXYZ into image without metacello and then run it, without caring if Metacello is installed or not (because configuration takes care of it). Sven Van Caekenberghe wrote: > On 19 Dec 2011, at 17:04, Ben Coman wrote: > >> I've been lurking this mail list for 6 - 9 months and had not picked that up. That is a big miss. I'm not usually so slow. Can you point me to the documentation that describes that process? >> > I agree, the UX is not (yet) perfect; so your comments are valid. > > Metacello was written with many different design goals: one of them is that it solve the 'chicken/egg' problem by allowing configurations to be loadable in images that do not yet contain anything related to Metacello ! That is why you always see this boilerplate with Gofer and the Smalltalk at: #ConfigurationOf.. > > Sven > Preface: I imagine what I discuss below has been thrashed out in the original design and discarded, but I'd like to learn this topic better. I understand wanting a lean core image, but once a single ConfigurationOfXXX is loaded, Metacello ends up installed. So the independence is only important for the very first loaded ConfigurationOfXXX. If you are using an lean-image that does not have any ConfigurationOfXXX loaded, then you are likely an advanced user who knows how to resolve the Metacello dependency. A pre-requisite of example b> above is Gofer. I notice that PharoCore-1.3-13315.zip there is no Gopher and in Pharo-1.3-13315 there is but also ConfigurationOfGofer. Since example b> ends up with Metacello fully installed, is there any common use case where ConfigurationOfGofer would not be installed first? At which point, can we assume that Metacello is installed for example b> ? Now I assume my following proposal is flawed with respect either good practice and/or the Pharo design goals - but since (from my perspective) Metacello is a critical part of Pharo, I am interested for my learning why it would be evil to include just the following stub in PharoCore... ---8<---snip Metacello class >> doesNotUnderstand: aSymbol self ensureMetacello Metacello class >> ensureMetacello [as per the Metacello template] ---8<---snip

Dec. 23, 2011