> > I don't quite think so. This change would have tremendous 
> > implications on lots and lots of the code and without being
> > able to deal with the efficiency issues during up-traversals
> > you will find that Morphic can in fact be a whole lot slower
> > than it is today ;-)
>
> I _really_ don't want to even imagine that. It's already annoying on
> anything less than 800MHz G3/PIII level. Please, let's see 
> redesigns and improvements to make it faster on lower end machines.

The trouble, of course, is that this isn't going to happen either unless you
do some overall redesign of the architecture. And here, you'll be faced with
a couple of hundred morph classes which will break in surprisingly new and
unforeseen ways on you. One of the major issues with respect to Morphic
deficiencies is that there are so few common bottlenecks (hot spots) which
would be worthwhile optimzing for. In order to get some significant speed
improvements you would have to introduce such bottlenecks first. And that's
almost impossible with the amount of (often inconsistent and often enough
plain broken) subclassing we see in Morphic.

> Disc space, the final frontier!

I like this ;-)

Cheers,
  - Andreas