Amber becoming slow to load (was: Re: [amber-lang] Re: Roassal in Amber)

> Not intention to open that issue so far.
>
> I used to do remote devleopment on Amber as Manfred does and with the
> system inside dropbox folder for realtime update of the edited files,
> while I'm off office at my home desktop. This way gave a lot of
> convenience at my leisure time.
>
> The thing that bothered me by Amber and/or it's future versions is that
> the amber web site might become more slowed at reloading the comitted
> contents at updating and more new functionality addons, making the
> remote editing more time consuming but in the new version 0.12, it had
> the advantage gained by new compiler with much improved comitting speed.
>
> Amber wound became slowed significantly esp. at low bandwidth, it might
> be worsened while the Amber system becoming more bulky, by adding more
> bower_component, requirejs and other node support modules.

>
>
> EnoX1 wrote:
>> Not intention to open that issue so far.
>>
>> I used to do remote devleopment on Amber as Manfred does and with the
>> system inside dropbox folder for realtime update of the edited files,
>> while I'm off office at my home desktop. This way gave a lot of
>> convenience at my leisure time.
>>
>> The thing that bothered me by Amber and/or it's future versions is that
>> the amber web site might become more slowed at reloading the comitted
>> contents at updating and more new functionality addons, making the
>> remote editing more time consuming but in the new version 0.12, it had
>> the advantage gained by new compiler with much improved comitting speed.
>>
>> Amber wound became slowed significantly esp. at low bandwidth, it might
>> be worsened while the Amber system becoming more bulky, by adding more
>> bower_component, requirejs and other node support modules.
>
> I don't understand this. Amber did not get any bulkier with
> bower_components (it loaded the same set of libraries before, they
> just was included by hand), not by require.js (which itself is pretty
> small compared to huge amber files; Amber had different loader before
> but loaded same data).
>
>> It became not as swifty and to be more bandwidth-demanding comparing to
>> other implementation. If it is inevitable for the smalltalk runtime, it
>> may be a factor to stop it from large scale scalable application, I
>> think.
>>
>> Just a think.
>>
>> Best regards.
>

> Are there test pages to show in details what modules/components that
> Amber loaded, the loading speed taken, the unit tests passed etc?
>
> On 2013/11/23 下午 09:36, Herby Vojčík wrote:
>>
>>
>> EnoX1 wrote:
>>> Not intention to open that issue so far.
>>>
>>> I used to do remote devleopment on Amber as Manfred does and with the
>>> system inside dropbox folder for realtime update of the edited files,
>>> while I'm off office at my home desktop. This way gave a lot of
>>> convenience at my leisure time.
>>>
>>> The thing that bothered me by Amber and/or it's future versions is that
>>> the amber web site might become more slowed at reloading the comitted
>>> contents at updating and more new functionality addons, making the
>>> remote editing more time consuming but in the new version 0.12, it had
>>> the advantage gained by new compiler with much improved comitting speed.
>>>
>>> Amber wound became slowed significantly esp. at low bandwidth, it might
>>> be worsened while the Amber system becoming more bulky, by adding more
>>> bower_component, requirejs and other node support modules.
>>
>> I don't understand this. Amber did not get any bulkier with
>> bower_components (it loaded the same set of libraries before, they
>> just was included by hand), not by require.js (which itself is pretty
>> small compared to huge amber files; Amber had different loader before
>> but loaded same data).
>>
>>> It became not as swifty and to be more bandwidth-demanding comparing to
>>> other implementation. If it is inevitable for the smalltalk runtime, it
>>> may be a factor to stop it from large scale scalable application, I
>>> think.
>>>
>>> Just a think.
>>>
>>> Best regards.
>>
>
> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
> "amber-lang" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an
> email to [hidden email].
> For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.
>