A greater than, say, 1% base CPU load from an otherwise idle application would indicate that it's doing some busy waiting somewhere... in my Activity Monitor, I don't see too many processes doing that, so just using an ObjC framework doesn't seem to be the guilty part. By the way, very old versions of VisualWorks used to be bad in that way, but not any more; so there is something that can be done about it.
A large virtual memory working set wouldn't help either for power efficiency, though with today's RAM sizes it's probably less important. On Oct 28, 2013, at 11:46, Yuriy Tymchuk <[email protected]> wrote: > It’s not about the thing that it uses 5% CPU. Apple does some magic with > optimisation so they group threads in order to reduce power usage. And Pharo > is not good at that. I’m not telling that Pharo is slow. Battery lasts longer > with Safari compared to Chrome. Probably with Pharo it’s something similar. > > On 28 Oct 2013, at 17:31, dimitris chloupis <[email protected]> wrote: >> I would not worry too much over this. I have MenuMeters even before I was >> introduced to smalltalk over a year ago and Pharo is steadily reported >> consuming a 5% of my CPU which is average for an ObjC app on Macos 10.7 >> >> http://www.ragingmenace.com/software/menumeters/ >> >> So personally I am impressed with pharo speed so far. A big thumbs up from >> me. Also take into account that even though MacOS is a great OS it comes >> with its own fair share of bugs, especially the first year of its release so >> I would not put too much attention into this if I was you. >> >> On Monday, 28 October 2013, 18:08, Yuriy Tymchuk <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> Now with Mavericks we can tell that Pharo is hungry for energy :) >> >> <Screenshot 2013-10-28 17.05.48.png> >> >> Cheers! >> Uko
