Thanks for tracking this down. On Wed, Aug 18, 2010 at 4:02 PM, Chris Hanks <[email protected]>wrote:
> I did some profiling and figured it out - I was using the > all_your_base gem, which was doing a lot of String#method_missing > stuff that was much better behaved on 1.8 than 1.9. I removed it, and > everything's back the way it should be. > > Thanks anyway! I'm really loving Haml. > > > > On Aug 18, 2:25 pm, Chris Hanks <[email protected]> wrote: > > I only have about a dozen templates right now, but they all seem to be > > affected. > > > > I tried getting the benchmarks to run, but kept getting an error: > > "test/benchmark.rb:63: undefined method `unmemoize_all' for > > #<ActionView::Base:0x9f77afc> (NoMethodError)" > > > > So instead I wrote my own smaller benchmark, which basically renders > > the markup only from my layout template. I gisted it here: > > > > http://gist.github.com/536231 > > > > Ruby 1.8.7 runs it in about 0.085 seconds and 1.9.2 takes about 0.145. > > So it's worse under 1.9.2, but not nearly enough to account for all > > the differences I'm seeing. I'll keep experimenting with it. > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "Haml" group. > To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > [email protected] <haml%[email protected]>. > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/haml?hl=en. > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Haml" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/haml?hl=en.
