Adrian Lienhard pravi: > We really need to change this situation. > > As Lukas pointed out, its not the OmniBrowser implementation that is > slow. There are some extended features of OmniBrowser that use > computation intensive or inefficient parts of the system like > PackageInfo. I really appreciate all these cool new features, but if > they make the browser slow, they defeat the whole purpose. > > Users don't know the details and they don't care. If they open a Pharo > image and its slow, then this just gives a bad impression. If people > start telling each other "Pharo is slow", we will loose reputation > that is very hard to win back. > > So I suggest to either disable the features that make the browser slow > so that it is snappy again or to replace it with the version Lukas is > using until it is fast enough.
I agree completely with Adrian here. Please switch off those dynamic category features and similar until they will run efficiently. Current impression speed-wise is actually very bad and only for the people with strong nerves. But for competition with other Smalltalks, no chance! And a chance with 1.0 release will be lost in a reputation you'll improve back very hard. JAnko > On Jul 14, 2009, at 11:49 , Michael Rueger wrote: > >> On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 11:47 AM, Stéphane >> Ducasse<[email protected]> wrote: >>> take the core image. >>> The default tools in web dev are too slow right now. >> Maybe we should point that out somewhere as we promote the dev-images >> as being "Pharo"? >> As we can see from some of the discussion on the Squeak list people >> then think Pharo in general is dog slow... >> >> Michael -- Janko Mivšek AIDA/Web Smalltalk Web Application Server http://www.aidaweb.si _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
