Hi Damien,

I like the dynamic protocols but don't use them because of the 
performance impact.

I was curious and profiled it. It looks like the local send cache is not 
being used as no interests are being declared.

In the code below I declare interest in everything. I'm not sure about 
the ramifications of this.

When cached it is almost usable - perhaps with some tweaking this 
excellent feature could be more widely used.

Regards,
Zulq.

protocols := DynamicProtocols allAvailableProtocols.
class := Object.

" clear caches "
protocols asArray collect: [:dp | dp invalidateCache].
LocalSends current initialize.

TimeProfileBrowser spyOn: [protocols
		collect: [:dpClass | dpClass on: aClass]
		thenSelect: [:dp | (dp getSelectorsFor: Object) notEmpty]].
" 9.69 seconds "

TimeProfileBrowser spyOn: [protocols
		collect: [:dpClass | dpClass on: aClass]
		thenSelect: [:dp | (dp getSelectorsFor: Object) notEmpty]].
" 6.44 seconds - improvement from caches in dynamic protocols themselves"

" declare interest in everything (maybe wrong) "
LocalSends current
	noteInterestOf: nil in: ProtoObject;
	noteInterestOf: nil inAll: ProtoObject allSubclasses.

" prime local send caches "
TimeProfileBrowser spyOn: [protocols
		collect: [:dpClass | dpClass on: aClass]
		thenSelect: [:dp | (dp getSelectorsFor: Object) notEmpty]].
"6.49 seconds "

" local sends cached "
TimeProfileBrowser spyOn: [protocols
		collect: [:dpClass | dpClass on: aClass]
		thenSelect: [:dp | (dp getSelectorsFor: Object) notEmpty]].
"0.69 seconds "


Damien Cassou wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> as the developer of both the Dynamic Protocols and the dev-images, I
> have included the firsts into the latter some times ago. I found them
> quite useful at that time. However, they slow down a lot the UI (which
> is already very slow). So, my question is:
> 
> Who wants me to continue including the dynamic protocols in the dev-images?
> 
> 
> Is there anyone using them?
> 
> Bye
>