On Mon, 28 Mar 2005 00:05:52 -0500, Daniel Salama <dsalama at user.net> wrote:

> As far as Seaside behavior in, I posted a similar question in Seaside's
> list
> (http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/seaside/2005-March/
> 004685.html) but didn't really get an answer for it. I thank Avi for
> letting me know that Transcript>>show is just about the worst thing I
> could use to show status progress but no one really addressed my
> question about Seaside/Squeak/GOODS performance (even though it's all
> relative to application needs and application design).

Daniel,

Which question wasn't addressed?  My point was that you were basing
your concerns about performance on a flawed benchmark because of the
involvement of the Transcript.  I figured that if   you then did
further testing and were still concerned, you'd post with new details
and we could address it then.

The operative phrase in your message seems to be "makes me just want to
not even try...".  When you're talking about performance, trying is
the only way to know anything.  In my experience, most assumptions
people make about the performance of the programs they write are
wrong, period.  Please, do some benchmarking before getting so
worried.

Avi