2014-12-05 10:55 GMT+01:00 Guillermo Polito <guillermopolito@gmail.com>:

I will summon Martin and Mariano here :).

Introducing fuel in the loading infrastructure had so far AFAIK two different experimental setups:
- tanker: a package completely written in fuel

Oh, I missed that one, yes. I remember the name.

�

- mixing tanker/fuel with monticello.

Sort of what I'm thinking about.

�

However, the results were not so promising I remember. Apparently when loading a package, most of the time is spent not in the deserialization/recompilation but in the update of the system (system dictionary, categories, rpackages, update the corresponding subclass relationships).

Just try the following: load a monticello package with (a) no Nautilus opened, and with (a) 10 Nautilus opened.

I profiled AltBrowser for that use case... It's a bit more vulnerable to that than Nautilus because you may see more of the structure at a given time than Nautilus (such as having a single browser watching the methods of two classes).

Still, once a bit optimised, MC loading time dominates. But I haven't looked too closely on exactly what; I was focused on getting the browser bit as small as possible. If anybody has things about the various costs, I'd be interested.

Thierry