Hi Bill,

> is there a way to refactor Alice so the classes would 
> not be necessary, and therefore would not need to be recompiled?  

There certainly is, but I have never looked at it. Mostly because
Wonderlands are the kind of 
environments where you don't create hundreds of actors dynamically. I don't
know what exactly you 
are doing but I would recommend looking at what class reshapes take place
and why. Most likely, a lot 
can be done just by reordering things a little.

Cheers,
  - Andreas

> Andreas,
> 
> A little profiling confirms your suspicion: it's full gc's.  It even 
> (especially!!!<g>) explains a pause from something that does not 
> create new objects.
> 
> There is good and bad in this for me.  The good new is that I don't 
> need the affected application.  It's an old game concept that I 
> revived as a test of Squeak.  The bad news is that this is a 
> situation in which lack of performance equates to lack of 
> functionality.  With the current perfomance hits, I doubt the game 
> would be playable.  I realize that I could bypass Alice, but then I'd 
> end up with my own buggy version of WonderlandActor.
> 
> I would not argue for removal of essential gc's from the class 
> builder, but is there a way to refactor Alice so the classes would 
> not be necessary, and therefore would not need to be recompiled?  
> The only other thing that comes to mind would be to allow bundles 
> of activity so that multiple changes could be followed by one full gc 
> at the end of block.  But, I think it would be better to elminate the 
> dependence on creating new classes, or to find another fix of the 
> classbuilder that does not require the gc's.
> 
> Thanks!
> 
> Bill
> 
> Wilhelm K. Schwab, Ph.D.
> bills at anest4.anest.ufl.edu
> (352) 846-1285
> 

-- 
+++ GMX - Mail, Messaging & more  http://www.gmx.net +++
NEU: Mit GMX ins Internet. Rund um die Uhr für 1 ct/ Min. surfen!