thanks for the analysis so we will have to speed it up too.
>>>>>> It does!
>>>>>> It seems that you did not work in VW2.5 and 3.0 and when parcels arrived
>>>>>> loading was realllllly a big difference
>>>>>> I do not see why this would not the same with Fuel.
>>>>>
>>>>> No I didn't, but the version number of VW is around 7.x now, so I guess
>>>>> the CPUs and VMs are now several times faster. Does it really matter if
>>>>> it takes 200ms or 20ms to load a package?
>>>>
>>>> When I load a package with MC so far I still notice it and I would not
>>>> even think about it.
>>>> It should load in a unnoticeable amount of time.
>>>
>>> Do you think MC is "slow" because the Compiler is "slow"?
>>
>> not totally but I do not understand why this is obligatory to compile
>> everything all the time.
>> Then Opal will be slower than the old comcrapiler.
>>
>
> I did a quick test where it took 4294ms to load RoelTyper + OCompletion from
> disk (no socket creation, no network latency, etc). These packages contain
> 790 methods. 5.1% of the total time was spent for compilation, that's 219ms.
> The rest is used by other stuff like:
> - loading the files from disk
> - writing the source code to disk (sources/changes files)
> - evaluating class side #initialize methods
> - processing system change notifications
>
> Another 51ms was spent in creating 63 classes and 107ms to install the
> CompiledMethods to the classes. So that's 219+51+107 = 377ms for creating all
> classes and their methods. The rest is administration which can not be
> avoided by binary loading.
>
> Even if binary loading is 10x faster than compiling the code (which I doubt),
> then you save 339ms. So it would take only 3917ms to load these packages.
> That would save you 7.9% of the total time.
>
>
> Levente
