2016-03-25 7:43 GMT+01:00 Clément Bera <[email protected]>: > Yeah this is very well-known. Note that here we are talking about the pi B > with Spur + the JIT, 2 years ago I remember needing 35 second on the pie A > to open Nautilus on the stack vm while the Squeak UI was usable. > > The Pharo UI has been focusing on IDE features at the cost of performance, > such as auto-completion, better RB integration, Nautilus, new debugging > tools... None of the current tools (Nautilus, GTInspector, GTPlayground, > ...) are fast enough for slower devices, some of them are barely fast > enough for a laptop (for example at some point there was no auto-refresh on > GTInspector because of performance). It's not clear if it's due to the new > tools themselves as Morphic is drastically slower too on Pharo. > > Morphic drasticallly slower ? I would expect morphic code is mostly the same in pharo and squeak. If pharo is slower, this is a good starting point for optimising. Can you gives some hints?
> The Squeak UI has been focusing on performance and stability. It is very > convenient for slow devices but also for slow VM like for example the debug > VM. > > The official answer to this problem is that Block/Brick will be faster so > it will solve all this problems. We will see. > > > 2016-03-25 1:15 GMT+01:00 Sean P. DeNigris <[email protected]>: > >> >> > [Squeak 5 is] so *fast* (I have it running next to >> > Pharo, which is unusable slow as a GUI. Whereas Squeak 5 is zipping >> > along at Windows desktop speeds on the Pi (Model B). >> >> >> >> >> >> ----- >> Cheers, >> Sean >> -- >> View this message in context: >> http://forum.world.st/Fwd-Squeak-5-on-Raspberry-Pi-tp4886416.html >> Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk Developers mailing list archive at >> Nabble.com. >> >> >
