The Timing of Time

stéphane ducasse ducasse at iam.unibe.ch
Mon Apr 17 10:47:37 UTC 2006


Hi avi

did you check whether this problem is fixed in 3.9?

Stef

On 13 avr. 06, at 09:37, Avi Bryant wrote:

>
> On Apr 13, 2006, at 12:08 AM, goran at krampe.se wrote:
>>
>> PS. But I do think the official Squeak should make a choice - there
>> should be a "Squeak standard". And of course, we did that pretty
>> recently - Chronology. Would be interesting to hear more about
>> pros/cons. :)
>
> What I can contribute here is that the performance benefits are  
> more than just theoretical - the poor performance of the Chronology  
> package has been responsible for a significant percentage of the  
> bottlenecks in our production code recently.  More than once, our  
> profiling has led us to some part of Chronology that was an order  
> of magnitude or two slower than it needed to be.  The most recent  
> example of a couple of days ago was DateAndTime>>hash - try  
> sticking a few thousand dates into a Set and you'll see what I  
> mean.  That can be sped up, in some cases, by a simple optimization  
> in DateAndTime>>asUTC:
>
> asUTC
> 	^ offset isZero
> 		ifTrue: [self]
> 		ifFalse: [self utcOffset: 0]
>
> Avi
>




More information about the Squeak-dev mailing list