Brent (and Gary), I agree with all these comments. Making VASSAL "faster and more responsive" is not one of the enhancements that I voted for as I feel it does pretty well as it is. I, too, will be interested to hear what others have in mind regarding this issue and what they are expecting from it.
I did vote for the enhancement regarding an easier method for setting the memory allocation as I, too, feel this would be a great usability feature. My $.02. Kevin ----- Original Message ----- From: Brent Easton To: [email protected] Sent: Sunday, February 04, 2007 7:54 PM Subject: Re: [vassalengine] Re: Performance Issues >*********** REPLY SEPARATOR *********** > >On 4/02/2007 at 6:38 PM Gary Krockover wrote: >I'm with you on this one Brent, VASSAL loads fast and the screen refresh >after scrolling is instantaneous. Zooming out can be a little slow, but >we're talking like 10-20 seconds on average and after you've zoomed out >once, it does so again instantly. Zooming is the main one I can think of. There is a specific RFE to introduce Map tiling which would both decrease memory usage and decrease the zoom time (as not all of the map is zoomed at once). >So, I'll be curious to see what the issues are for some people and what, >if anything can be done to help in those situations. As modules get more complicated, with more Global key processing and all sorts of things happening in the background, some modules are slowing down. There is a limit to what can be achieved with what is essentially an interpretive environment (VASSAL) being processed on an interpretive system (Java). Once modules get to a certain complexity, custom Java code is required to keep them from bogging down. The beauty of using Java is that we do have this option available. The scripting language RFE also has the potential to help out here as people will be able to write their own 'customized code' without needing a Java IDE set up. There is an existing open-source scripting language (Beanshell) which would work perfectly - still a fairly big project to shoehorn it in though. >I think that the one thing that might come to mind is having the memory >allocation set in the preferences; or was that another option already - >thought I saw it but maybe people grouped it with this one? Yes, there is an RFE to make it easier/more convenient to set the memory allocation. In terms of support and general inconvenience, I consider this the number one priority of all! Cheersm Brent. __________________________________________________________ Brent Easton Analyst/Programmer University of Western Sydney Email: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [Non-text portions of this message have been removed]
