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
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 3:55 AM, Thierry Lebourque zebourk@gmail.com 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 Magma@lists.squeakfoundation.org 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 asqueaker@gmail.com:
On Mon, May 2, 2011 at 3:55 AM, Thierry Lebourque zebourk@gmail.com 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 Magma@lists.squeakfoundation.org http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/magma
magma@lists.squeakfoundation.org