4 Nov
2010
4 Nov
'10
11:10 a.m.
I started to replace PackageOrganizerCache by RPackage. What I did is:
-> first Look at all references to PackageOrganizerCache
-> replace those refererences by a corresponding use of RPackage
-> run tests and fix them one by one
I'm in a state where all tests seem to be green.
Now I don't know how we want to integrate that. With stephane we
talked about having a kind of 'transition state': we would have the
possibility to use either the PackageOrganizerCache or either
RPackage, so that if something's wrong, we can quickly return to a
working version of moose.
Or maybe it would be better to integrate that directly ?
I guess that there is also some test to make about the performance. By
comparing quickly with old result registered in MooseScripts, RPackage
seems to be a bit slower than POC.But I should make a more precise
comparison using the same machine and vm for both.
To load the version using RPackage, in a moose image evaluate:
Gofer new
squeaksource: 'PharoTaskForces';
package: 'ConfigurationOfRPackage';
load.
(Smalltalk globals at: #ConfigurationOfRPackage) loadDefault.
Gofer new
squeaksource: 'DelaunayTmpStuffs';
package: 'Moose-SmalltalkImporter';
merge.
Gofer new
squeaksource: 'DelaunayTmpStuffs';
package: 'Moose-Tests-SmalltalkImporter-Core';
merge.
Gofer new
squeaksource: 'DelaunayTmpStuffs';
package: 'Moose-Tests-SmalltalkImporter-KGB';
merge.
see http://code.google.com/p/moose-technology/issues/detail?id=414
2010/10/27 Stéphane Ducasse <stephane.ducasse(a)inria.fr>
On Oct 27, 2010, at 4:48 PM, Simon Denier wrote:
On 27 oct. 2010, at 16:27, Cyrille Delaunay wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I'm currently looking at the use of the PackageOrganizerCache in Moose.
> There was some work in pharo about a new, more performant,
better-structured
(I think it's the idea ? :)) 'Package system' called
RPackage.
> So before doing anything, I would like to
know more about the use of
PackageOrganizerCache:
> - Why do we use a cache ? I guess this is
because accessing directly
parent packages of specific classes or methods was to
slow using the current
package system.
> - If this is the good answer :), why was it
too long? could another
package system (RPackage) solve this problem and avoid us
to use a cache ?
> - For which kind of task is used the
packageCache in Moose? I saw that
it was used at the import of smalltalk code, to
link classes and method to
their parent package, is that all ?
Basically, yes, yes, and yes.
The current package system (PackageOrganizer + PackageInfo) is reeeally
slow for
some tasks, like computing package of methods (to detect class
extensions), and it really brought down the Smalltalk importer to its knee
on even not so large models. The big problem now is linking the package
organizer to system events, so that it updates itself whenever a package is
added, renamed, removed, changed...
So far this is not done in RPackage because the event were not there. But
now they are available so we should check that.
I will check and discuss that with cyrille because this will help us.
This was not done with PackageOrganizerCache
because it's a bit difficult
and because it was just a workaround at the time.
Now RPackage should
replace the current organizer and has to take care of such events. It also
appear that RPackage initializes itself faster than PackageOrganizerCache
(probably because it's more clever in its usage of PackageInfo API).
I do not know. So long that I looked at Rpackage.
Anyway, it's a problem specific to the
Smalltalk importer, not to Moose
or Famix in general.
--
Simon
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev
_______________________________________________
Moose-dev mailing list
Moose-dev(a)iam.unibe.ch
https://www.iam.unibe.ch/mailman/listinfo/moose-dev