about and:and: and and:
Locked
 
|
hi nicolas
I saw that you apply some automatic refactoring in squeak about and:and: -> and: and I wanted to know. Is and: more optimized than and:and: (I imagine that) but I would like to know for sure. Stef _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
|
|
The NewCompiler optimizes #and:and:and: to an optimized and nested
#and:. The standard compiler does a normal message send with block activations for each condition and thus is dead slow. Lukas 2010/1/4 Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]>: > hi nicolas > > I saw that you apply some automatic refactoring in squeak about and:and: -> and: > and I wanted to know. Is and: more optimized than and:and: (I imagine that) but I would like > to know for sure. > > Stef > > > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > -- Lukas Renggli http://www.lukas-renggli.ch _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
|
|
My point was:
- these messages are Squeak specific - they are slow (didn't knew about NewCompiler...) - do they really add some value over nested and: ? Nicolas 2010/1/4 Lukas Renggli <[hidden email]>: > The NewCompiler optimizes #and:and:and: to an optimized and nested > #and:. The standard compiler does a normal message send with block > activations for each condition and thus is dead slow. > > Lukas > > 2010/1/4 Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]>: >> hi nicolas >> >> I saw that you apply some automatic refactoring in squeak about and:and: -> and: >> and I wanted to know. Is and: more optimized than and:and: (I imagine that) but I would like >> to know for sure. >> >> Stef >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > > > > -- > Lukas Renggli > http://www.lukas-renggli.ch > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
|
|
In reply to this post by Lukas Renggli
Thanks lukas
so we could get rid of them :) Stef On Jan 4, 2010, at 9:12 AM, Lukas Renggli wrote: > The NewCompiler optimizes #and:and:and: to an optimized and nested > #and:. The standard compiler does a normal message send with block > activations for each condition and thus is dead slow. > > Lukas > > 2010/1/4 Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]>: >> hi nicolas >> >> I saw that you apply some automatic refactoring in squeak about and:and: -> and: >> and I wanted to know. Is and: more optimized than and:and: (I imagine that) but I would like >> to know for sure. >> >> Stef >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > > > > -- > Lukas Renggli > http://www.lukas-renggli.ch > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
|
|
In reply to this post by Nicolas Cellier
Nicolas
I would love to get the latest version cleanup automatically If by accident a huge slice would be committed into the pharoInbox. what the others think? Stef On Jan 4, 2010, at 9:26 AM, Nicolas Cellier wrote: > My point was: > - these messages are Squeak specific > - they are slow (didn't knew about NewCompiler...) > - do they really add some value over nested and: ? > > Nicolas > > 2010/1/4 Lukas Renggli <[hidden email]>: >> The NewCompiler optimizes #and:and:and: to an optimized and nested >> #and:. The standard compiler does a normal message send with block >> activations for each condition and thus is dead slow. >> >> Lukas >> >> 2010/1/4 Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]>: >>> hi nicolas >>> >>> I saw that you apply some automatic refactoring in squeak about and:and: -> and: >>> and I wanted to know. Is and: more optimized than and:and: (I imagine that) but I would like >>> to know for sure. >>> >>> Stef >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Lukas Renggli >> http://www.lukas-renggli.ch >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
|
|
From Slime:
RBParseTreeRewriter new replace: '``@expr1 and: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 ] and: [ | `@temp3 | ``@expr3 ]' with: '``@expr1 and: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 and: [ | `@temp3 | ``@expr3 ] ]'; replace: '``@expr1 and: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 ] and: [ | `@temp3 | ``@expr3 ] and: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 ]' with: '``@expr1 and: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 and: [ | `@temp3 | ``@expr3 and: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 ] ] ]'; replace: '``@expr1 and: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 ] and: [ | `@temp3 | ``@expr3 ] and: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 ] and: [ | `@temp5 | ``@expr5 ]' with: '``@expr1 and: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 and: [ | `@temp3 | ``@expr3 and: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 and: [ | `@temp5 | ``@expr5 ] ] ] ]'; replace: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 ] or: [ | `@temp3 | ``@expr3 ]' with: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 or: [ | `@temp3 | ``@expr3 ] ]'; replace: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 ] or: [ | `@temp3 | ``@expr3 ] or: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 ]' with: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 or: [ | `@temp3 | ``@expr3 or: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 ] ] ]'; replace: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 ] or: [ | `@temp3 | ``@expr3 ] or: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 ] or: [ | `@temp5 | ``@expr5 ]' with: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 or: [ | `@temp3 | ``@expr3 or: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 or: [ | `@temp5 | ``@expr5 ] ] ] ]'; replace: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 ] or: [ | `@temp3 | ``@expr3 ] or: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 ] or: [ | `@temp5 | ``@expr5 ] or: [ | `@temp6 | ``@expr6 ]' with: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 or: [ | `@temp3 | ``@expr3 or: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 or: [ | `@temp5 | ``@expr5 or: [ | `@temp6 | ``@expr6 ] ] ] ] ]'; yourself 2010/1/4 Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]>: > Nicolas > I would love to get the latest version cleanup automatically > If by accident a huge slice would be committed into the pharoInbox. > what the others think? > > Stef > > On Jan 4, 2010, at 9:26 AM, Nicolas Cellier wrote: > >> My point was: >> - these messages are Squeak specific >> - they are slow (didn't knew about NewCompiler...) >> - do they really add some value over nested and: ? >> >> Nicolas >> >> 2010/1/4 Lukas Renggli <[hidden email]>: >>> The NewCompiler optimizes #and:and:and: to an optimized and nested >>> #and:. The standard compiler does a normal message send with block >>> activations for each condition and thus is dead slow. >>> >>> Lukas >>> >>> 2010/1/4 Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]>: >>>> hi nicolas >>>> >>>> I saw that you apply some automatic refactoring in squeak about and:and: -> and: >>>> and I wanted to know. Is and: more optimized than and:and: (I imagine that) but I would like >>>> to know for sure. >>>> >>>> Stef >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>> [hidden email] >>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Lukas Renggli >>> http://www.lukas-renggli.ch >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > -- Lukas Renggli http://www.lukas-renggli.ch _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
|
|
If this preserves formatting, proceed, else, beware.
Given there were few senders in trunk, my change was manual, not automatic (Steph didn't you mean systematic ?). Nicolas 2010/1/4 Lukas Renggli <[hidden email]>: > From Slime: > > RBParseTreeRewriter new > replace: '``@expr1 and: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 ] and: [ | `@temp3 | ``@expr3 ]' > with: '``@expr1 and: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 and: [ | `@temp3 | ``@expr3 ] ]'; > replace: '``@expr1 and: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 ] and: [ | `@temp3 | > ``@expr3 ] and: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 ]' > with: '``@expr1 and: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 and: [ | `@temp3 | > ``@expr3 and: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 ] ] ]'; > replace: '``@expr1 and: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 ] and: [ | `@temp3 | > ``@expr3 ] and: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 ] and: [ | `@temp5 | ``@expr5 > ]' > with: '``@expr1 and: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 and: [ | `@temp3 | > ``@expr3 and: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 and: [ | `@temp5 | ``@expr5 ] ] ] > ]'; > replace: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 ] or: [ | `@temp3 | ``@expr3 ]' > with: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 or: [ | `@temp3 | ``@expr3 ] ]'; > replace: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 ] or: [ | `@temp3 | > ``@expr3 ] or: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 ]' > with: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 or: [ | `@temp3 | > ``@expr3 or: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 ] ] ]'; > replace: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 ] or: [ | `@temp3 | > ``@expr3 ] or: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 ] or: [ | `@temp5 | ``@expr5 ]' > with: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 or: [ | `@temp3 | > ``@expr3 or: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 or: [ | `@temp5 | ``@expr5 ] ] ] > ]'; > replace: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 ] or: [ | `@temp3 | > ``@expr3 ] or: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 ] or: [ | `@temp5 | ``@expr5 ] > or: [ | `@temp6 | ``@expr6 ]' > with: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 or: [ | `@temp3 | > ``@expr3 or: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 or: [ | `@temp5 | ``@expr5 or: [ | > `@temp6 | ``@expr6 ] ] ] ] ]'; > yourself > > 2010/1/4 Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]>: >> Nicolas >> I would love to get the latest version cleanup automatically >> If by accident a huge slice would be committed into the pharoInbox. >> what the others think? >> >> Stef >> >> On Jan 4, 2010, at 9:26 AM, Nicolas Cellier wrote: >> >>> My point was: >>> - these messages are Squeak specific >>> - they are slow (didn't knew about NewCompiler...) >>> - do they really add some value over nested and: ? >>> >>> Nicolas >>> >>> 2010/1/4 Lukas Renggli <[hidden email]>: >>>> The NewCompiler optimizes #and:and:and: to an optimized and nested >>>> #and:. The standard compiler does a normal message send with block >>>> activations for each condition and thus is dead slow. >>>> >>>> Lukas >>>> >>>> 2010/1/4 Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]>: >>>>> hi nicolas >>>>> >>>>> I saw that you apply some automatic refactoring in squeak about and:and: -> and: >>>>> and I wanted to know. Is and: more optimized than and:and: (I imagine that) but I would like >>>>> to know for sure. >>>>> >>>>> Stef >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>>> [hidden email] >>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Lukas Renggli >>>> http://www.lukas-renggli.ch >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>> [hidden email] >>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > > > > -- > Lukas Renggli > http://www.lukas-renggli.ch > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
|
|
This very likely does not preserve the formatting. The rewrite
completely restructures the AST. Lukas 2010/1/4 Nicolas Cellier <[hidden email]>: > If this preserves formatting, proceed, else, beware. > Given there were few senders in trunk, my change was manual, not > automatic (Steph didn't you mean systematic ?). > > Nicolas > > 2010/1/4 Lukas Renggli <[hidden email]>: >> From Slime: >> >> RBParseTreeRewriter new >> replace: '``@expr1 and: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 ] and: [ | `@temp3 | ``@expr3 ]' >> with: '``@expr1 and: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 and: [ | `@temp3 | ``@expr3 ] ]'; >> replace: '``@expr1 and: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 ] and: [ | `@temp3 | >> ``@expr3 ] and: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 ]' >> with: '``@expr1 and: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 and: [ | `@temp3 | >> ``@expr3 and: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 ] ] ]'; >> replace: '``@expr1 and: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 ] and: [ | `@temp3 | >> ``@expr3 ] and: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 ] and: [ | `@temp5 | ``@expr5 >> ]' >> with: '``@expr1 and: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 and: [ | `@temp3 | >> ``@expr3 and: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 and: [ | `@temp5 | ``@expr5 ] ] ] >> ]'; >> replace: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 ] or: [ | `@temp3 | ``@expr3 ]' >> with: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 or: [ | `@temp3 | ``@expr3 ] ]'; >> replace: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 ] or: [ | `@temp3 | >> ``@expr3 ] or: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 ]' >> with: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 or: [ | `@temp3 | >> ``@expr3 or: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 ] ] ]'; >> replace: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 ] or: [ | `@temp3 | >> ``@expr3 ] or: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 ] or: [ | `@temp5 | ``@expr5 ]' >> with: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 or: [ | `@temp3 | >> ``@expr3 or: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 or: [ | `@temp5 | ``@expr5 ] ] ] >> ]'; >> replace: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 ] or: [ | `@temp3 | >> ``@expr3 ] or: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 ] or: [ | `@temp5 | ``@expr5 ] >> or: [ | `@temp6 | ``@expr6 ]' >> with: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 or: [ | `@temp3 | >> ``@expr3 or: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 or: [ | `@temp5 | ``@expr5 or: [ | >> `@temp6 | ``@expr6 ] ] ] ] ]'; >> yourself >> >> 2010/1/4 Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]>: >>> Nicolas >>> I would love to get the latest version cleanup automatically >>> If by accident a huge slice would be committed into the pharoInbox. >>> what the others think? >>> >>> Stef >>> >>> On Jan 4, 2010, at 9:26 AM, Nicolas Cellier wrote: >>> >>>> My point was: >>>> - these messages are Squeak specific >>>> - they are slow (didn't knew about NewCompiler...) >>>> - do they really add some value over nested and: ? >>>> >>>> Nicolas >>>> >>>> 2010/1/4 Lukas Renggli <[hidden email]>: >>>>> The NewCompiler optimizes #and:and:and: to an optimized and nested >>>>> #and:. The standard compiler does a normal message send with block >>>>> activations for each condition and thus is dead slow. >>>>> >>>>> Lukas >>>>> >>>>> 2010/1/4 Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]>: >>>>>> hi nicolas >>>>>> >>>>>> I saw that you apply some automatic refactoring in squeak about and:and: -> and: >>>>>> and I wanted to know. Is and: more optimized than and:and: (I imagine that) but I would like >>>>>> to know for sure. >>>>>> >>>>>> Stef >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>>>> [hidden email] >>>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Lukas Renggli >>>>> http://www.lukas-renggli.ch >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>>> [hidden email] >>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>> [hidden email] >>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Lukas Renggli >> http://www.lukas-renggli.ch >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project > -- Lukas Renggli http://www.lukas-renggli.ch _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
|
|
In reply to this post by Nicolas Cellier
You did that manually :)
Ok so may be since there are only few senders I can do it too :) Stef > If this preserves formatting, proceed, else, beware. > Given there were few senders in trunk, my change was manual, not > automatic (Steph didn't you mean systematic ?). > > Nicolas > > 2010/1/4 Lukas Renggli <[hidden email]>: >> From Slime: >> >> RBParseTreeRewriter new >> replace: '``@expr1 and: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 ] and: [ | `@temp3 | ``@expr3 ]' >> with: '``@expr1 and: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 and: [ | `@temp3 | ``@expr3 ] ]'; >> replace: '``@expr1 and: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 ] and: [ | `@temp3 | >> ``@expr3 ] and: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 ]' >> with: '``@expr1 and: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 and: [ | `@temp3 | >> ``@expr3 and: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 ] ] ]'; >> replace: '``@expr1 and: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 ] and: [ | `@temp3 | >> ``@expr3 ] and: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 ] and: [ | `@temp5 | ``@expr5 >> ]' >> with: '``@expr1 and: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 and: [ | `@temp3 | >> ``@expr3 and: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 and: [ | `@temp5 | ``@expr5 ] ] ] >> ]'; >> replace: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 ] or: [ | `@temp3 | ``@expr3 ]' >> with: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 or: [ | `@temp3 | ``@expr3 ] ]'; >> replace: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 ] or: [ | `@temp3 | >> ``@expr3 ] or: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 ]' >> with: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 or: [ | `@temp3 | >> ``@expr3 or: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 ] ] ]'; >> replace: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 ] or: [ | `@temp3 | >> ``@expr3 ] or: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 ] or: [ | `@temp5 | ``@expr5 ]' >> with: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 or: [ | `@temp3 | >> ``@expr3 or: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 or: [ | `@temp5 | ``@expr5 ] ] ] >> ]'; >> replace: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 ] or: [ | `@temp3 | >> ``@expr3 ] or: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 ] or: [ | `@temp5 | ``@expr5 ] >> or: [ | `@temp6 | ``@expr6 ]' >> with: '``@expr1 or: [ | `@temp2 | ``@expr2 or: [ | `@temp3 | >> ``@expr3 or: [ | `@temp4 | ``@expr4 or: [ | `@temp5 | ``@expr5 or: [ | >> `@temp6 | ``@expr6 ] ] ] ] ]'; >> yourself >> >> 2010/1/4 Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]>: >>> Nicolas >>> I would love to get the latest version cleanup automatically >>> If by accident a huge slice would be committed into the pharoInbox. >>> what the others think? >>> >>> Stef >>> >>> On Jan 4, 2010, at 9:26 AM, Nicolas Cellier wrote: >>> >>>> My point was: >>>> - these messages are Squeak specific >>>> - they are slow (didn't knew about NewCompiler...) >>>> - do they really add some value over nested and: ? >>>> >>>> Nicolas >>>> >>>> 2010/1/4 Lukas Renggli <[hidden email]>: >>>>> The NewCompiler optimizes #and:and:and: to an optimized and nested >>>>> #and:. The standard compiler does a normal message send with block >>>>> activations for each condition and thus is dead slow. >>>>> >>>>> Lukas >>>>> >>>>> 2010/1/4 Stéphane Ducasse <[hidden email]>: >>>>>> hi nicolas >>>>>> >>>>>> I saw that you apply some automatic refactoring in squeak about and:and: -> and: >>>>>> and I wanted to know. Is and: more optimized than and:and: (I imagine that) but I would like >>>>>> to know for sure. >>>>>> >>>>>> Stef >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>>>> [hidden email] >>>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> Lukas Renggli >>>>> http://www.lukas-renggli.ch >>>>> >>>>> _______________________________________________ >>>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>>> [hidden email] >>>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>>>> >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________ >>>> Pharo-project mailing list >>>> [hidden email] >>>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>> >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Pharo-project mailing list >>> [hidden email] >>> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> Lukas Renggli >> http://www.lukas-renggli.ch >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Pharo-project mailing list >> [hidden email] >> http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project >> > > _______________________________________________ > Pharo-project mailing list > [hidden email] > http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project _______________________________________________ Pharo-project mailing list [hidden email] http://lists.gforge.inria.fr/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pharo-project |
«
Return to Pharo Smalltalk Developers
|
1 view|%1 views
| Free forum by Nabble | Edit this page |