Hi,
Diving into Magma, I have found some information that look, to me, quite contradictory about MagmaCollections. Here: http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/2639 I understand that they are a good choice for large collections of objects. And here: http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/2986 it is said that they should not be used. Well, I have a large collection of objects and MagmaCollections seemed to meet my requirements in terms of accessing, but, according to the wiki, not in terms of performances. So my question is: are they usable or should I implement my own version ? Regards, Thierry _______________________________________________ Magma mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/magma |
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 3:55 AM, Thierry Lebourque <[hidden email]> wrote:
> Hi, > > Diving into Magma, I have found some information that look, to me, > quite contradictory about MagmaCollections. > > Here: http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/2639 I understand that they are a > good choice for large collections of objects. Indeed, they can be. There is also MagmaArray and MagmaPreallocatedDictionary and, in the latest Magma alpha code, "MagmaHashTable" which provides a balance between speed and key-access. > And here: http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/2986 it is said that they > should not be used. Please read it more closely, it does not say that.. > Well, I have a large collection of objects and MagmaCollections seemed > to meet my requirements in terms of accessing, but, according to the > wiki, not in terms of performances. > > So my question is: are they usable or should I implement my own version ? There are many different kinds of Collections, you should choose the ones that can minimally meet your requirements. MagmaCollections were designed to provide keyword-access to objects, but are often overkill for other purposes.. - Chris > > Regards, > > Thierry > _______________________________________________ > Magma mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/magma > _______________________________________________ Magma mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/magma |
Thank you. After a more careful reading and some investigations, I
think I understand now what is meant. Actually, I think I must forget what I have learned in my (small) RDBMS experience :) 2011/5/2 Chris Muller <[hidden email]>: > On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 3:55 AM, Thierry Lebourque <[hidden email]> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> Diving into Magma, I have found some information that look, to me, >> quite contradictory about MagmaCollections. >> >> Here: http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/2639 I understand that they are a >> good choice for large collections of objects. > > Indeed, they can be. There is also MagmaArray and > MagmaPreallocatedDictionary and, in the latest Magma alpha code, > "MagmaHashTable" which provides a balance between speed and > key-access. > >> And here: http://wiki.squeak.org/squeak/2986 it is said that they >> should not be used. > > Please read it more closely, it does not say that.. > >> Well, I have a large collection of objects and MagmaCollections seemed >> to meet my requirements in terms of accessing, but, according to the >> wiki, not in terms of performances. >> >> So my question is: are they usable or should I implement my own version ? > > There are many different kinds of Collections, you should choose the > ones that can minimally meet your requirements. MagmaCollections were > designed to provide keyword-access to objects, but are often overkill > for other purposes.. > > - Chris > > > > >> >> Regards, >> >> Thierry >> _______________________________________________ >> Magma mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/magma >> > Magma mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/magma |
Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |