OpenEuphoria

Re: Interpreter startup speed

• Posted by Al Getz <Xaxo at aol.com> Aug 21, 2006
• 702 views

Derek Parnell wrote:
> 
> Just to get a few facts right...
> 
> 2.4 and 2.5 are about the same when it comes to "loading" time. The difference
> is that 2.4 can begin executing programs before they are fully loaded whereas
> 2.5 does not start to execute them until they are fully loaded.
> 
> Furthermore, it seems that this is only a problem with old PCs that are
> running
> programs with huge libraries, such as win32lib. If you cannot/will not change
> PCs then the use of huge libraries needs to change. For example, if Win32lib
> was a DLL then it would be pre-loaded and compiled rather than interpreted.
> Then your small programs (< 20,000 lines) that use the library will not have
> such an apparent slow start-up time.
> 
> So maybe we should look at getting huge libraries to be DLLs rather than
> modify
> the interpreter, as that would seem to have the biggest bang for the buck. I'm
> sure that the interpreter can be improved but at best that might give you 10%
> better start-up times, but a DLL for Win32lib would give many factors of
> improvement.
> 
> I vaguely remember that someone had does this but I'm not sure of the current
> state of play.
> 
> 
> -- 
> Derek Parnell
> Melbourne, Australia
> Skype name: derek.j.parnell

Hi there Derek,


Yes i agree pretty much.  Im just starting to think about this again too.

One thing i was wondering though, is that at some point i remember
you saying you were working on a Euphoria clone right?  Are you
still working on that and if so, when will you have something ready?
I would be interested in something that would load .exw files fast.
Not too interested in Binding, and i feel that should be left to
RDS anyway.


Take care,
Al

E boa sorte com sua programacao Euphoria!


My bumper sticker: "I brake for LED's"

 From "Black Knight":
"I can live with losing the good fight,
 but i can not live without fighting it".
"Well on second thought, maybe not."