Doug Way wrote:
On Oct 2, 2004, at 2:59 AM, danielv@tx.technion.ac.il wrote:
So, why don't you write a test for it?
:-)
testForSlugishness self assert: [Browser open "and other stuff you do"] timeToRun < "some reasonable delay for that"
True, this will fail for slow machines, but that reasonable.
Actually, better yet you could have a quick tinyBenchmarks test as part of the testForSlugishness to use as a sort of baseline for machine speed. Then, you could test that "Browser open" or whatever only takes a certain amount of time relative to your sends/sec speed, so it should be roughly equivalent on slow & fast machines.
There is a problem with timeToRun: it is not independent from other running Squeak or system processes. Better would be a measurement of executed bytecodes and message sends for just this test, which should be independent from interrupts. This is especially important for tests, which mustn't fail.
Any idea?
Greetings Stephan
- Doug
Daniel
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?st=E9phane_ducasse?= ducasse@iam.unibe.ch wrote:
Diego
I found that in the 6272 image (may be before) the UI is reacting more slowly than with previous 3.8 unstable images. Does anybody else see that? Diego have you noticed something too? I'm on mac.
Stef