Some comparisons between Squeak versions: (MethodContexts)

Previous Topic Next Topic
classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
1 message Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view

Some comparisons between Squeak versions: (MethodContexts)

Jerome Peace
Hi Craig,

>some comparisons between Squeak versions
>Craig Latta craig at
>Sat Aug 26 16:34:03 UTC 2006 wrote:  

>Hi Peace--
>     Each non-meta class has a method dictionary and
a metaclass, which
>has its own method dictionary. So there are supposed
to be two method
>dictionaries for each non-meta class.

Yep. That was my second guess. So what about the
dictionarys above the 2*class number?
>     Why do you want to count MethodContexts? The
number of them varies
>significantly from moment to moment as the system
runs, so any static
>count isn't very meaningful. It corresponds very
roughly to the number
>of existing processes in the system, but not so well
that I'd even
>bother comparing that figure between different
versions of Squeak.

Well, ignorance is a wonderful thing. It makes you
curious about stuff that if you knew what you were
doing might not be interesting.

I'm still wondering if the number of MethodContexts
hanging around at the beginning (of a fresh image) are
significant of something more. The difference in
number was curious.

I started this quest out of a curiosity to see what
squeak was made of (a megabyte here a megabyte there
and pretty soon your talking real memory).  So it
became interesting to track anything with more than 1K
instances. And then I got curious to compare versions
to see if the numbers had changed dramatically or not.

The results seemed interesting enough to publish on
squeak-dev.  I hope to get enough feedback to start
looking at more significantly interesting stuff next

Cheers -- Jer

Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around