oh this would be good. Stef
On Oct 31, 2009, at 7:19 PM, Andres Valloud wrote: > Ok, I can prepare the checkpointed changesets for Martin's changes > then. > > Stéphane Ducasse wrote: >> Ok since there were some other discussions I think that andres and >> martin got a consensus >> on the solution (I had the impression that the one of martin was >> prefered). >> So as soon as the code is ok we will integrate that. >> >> Stef >> >> >> >> On Oct 29, 2009, at 10:39 AM, Nicolas Cellier wrote: >> >> >>> After-thoughts: my opinion is: >>> Martin solution is more pragmatical : it is tailored for getting >>> most >>> improvment with minimal change in system. >>> But formally, I prefer Andres design for it's clarity. >>> - I do not like the idea that #identityHash and #primIdentityHash do >>> behave differently >>> - #scaledIdentityHash does clearly express itself on the contrary >>> But that turns into german discussions ;) >>> >>> Nicolas >>> >>> 2009/10/29 Nicolas Cellier <[email protected]>: >>> >>>> 2009/10/28 Stéphane Ducasse <[email protected]>: >>>> >>>>> Martin >>>>> >>>>> are these changes related to the graphs you sent? >>>>> I will have a look after my hospital check. >>>>> Andres? Nicolas? >>>>> Any feedback? >>>>> Martin I imagine that I can package the changes :) >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Stef >>>>> >>>>> >>>> This has been pretty well explained by Martin and Andres. >>>> The decision you have to make is : >>>> >>>> - choose Martin change, make speed improvment for most senders of >>>> #identityHash, but eventually break a few senders and let package >>>> maintainers fix it (example Magma) >>>> - choose Andres change, assure 100% compatibility, let the >>>> responsibility to package maintainers to use new message for >>>> improving >>>> speed. >>>> >>>> In both cases, package maintainer might have to maintain different >>>> branch for Squeak and Pharo, but I guess the solution would be >>>> adopted >>>> soon in Squeak/trunk. >>>> >>>> I would tend to be conservative, but I recently took the opposite >>>> path >>>> with #keys and #selectors in trunk, so I just can't give you my >>>> personal preference, it's 50-50... >>>> Whatever the choice, #identityHash usage is worth a review by >>>> package >>>> maintainers anyway. >>>> >>>> Note that this is closely related to >>>> http://bugs.squeak.org/view.php?id=1876 and >>>> http://code.google.com/p/pharo/issues/detail?id=213 >>>> Amazing the issue is still there when workarounds are known for so >>>> long... So please do something! >>>> >>>> Nicolas >>>> >>>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> . >> >> > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project
