Re: speed of eu 2.5 + dynamic inclusion
- Posted by "Juergen Luethje" <j.lue at gmx.de> Nov 20, 2004
- 1057 views
Alexander Toresson wrote: > Now that I've tried the new interpreter, I find the parsing speed of it to be > unacceptable. > I do normally program everything on my laptop, to make myself able to work > anywhere. > It's not very fast. It's a p2 300. And because of that I get another > advantage: > I can easily see how a program of mine performs on a slower computer. > And I expect euphoria to work at an acceptable speed on older systems too. > Because I care about back-compatibility and I think it's one of the biggest > factors > one has to take into account when developing an application. > > The first application I developed was a DOS application, intended to run on a > 486 75. > I wouldn't dare of doing that now. > > Here are the times(p2 300): > > Simple win32lib application: 10s startup (eu2.4: 1.5s) > MEditor: 1 min 10s startup (!) (eu2.4: 3.5s) Of course, I also see the disadvantage, but I think it mainly concerns to: o newbies o other people who don't have the binder/shrouder o the developement process of a program/library ==> I hope we can inlude "shrouded" IL libraries!! When you don't want to change the MEditor source, but just want to use it like any other editor, then why not use a shrouded/bound/compiled version? When I use Word, ConTEXT and whatever else "editors", I always run .EXE files. > I've also found out that because everything is parsed before the program is > run, > dynamic inclusion cannot be done, ie writing include statements to a file > and then including it. For example, both the jarod library, my asm debugger > and > a project I currently work on is affected. They simply won't run. > > It can be worked around for jarod and the asm debugger, though it cannot be > worked around > for my current project. It includes all *.e files it finds in a specific > directory, > using them as plugins. And no, don't tell me to compile them into dlls. > Because that > shouldn't be needed. And I don't own the full translator. Concerning this point, I had an idea some time ago (URL might wrap): http://www.listfilter.com/cgi-bin/esearch.exu?fromMonth=2&fromYear=9&toMonth=2&toYear=9&postedBy=Juergen+Luethje&keywords=%2214+Feb+2004+10%3A54%3A22%22 Maybe you can tell me, whether it actually works? > This is it. I'm downgrading to 2.4. Even though it'll mess up my associations > again. > Oh well. Here is a little workaround: Run 'regedit', and save the concerning brances of the registry to .REG files. (Use an editor to merge the files to a single .REG file.) Restoring your associations then just means double-clicking at the .REG file(s). Regards, Juergen