On Feb 7, 2008 10:47 AM, Zulq Alam <me at zulq.net> wrote:
> Juan José Evangelista wrote:
> >
> > The first thing that is annoying to me is the progress bar. I think that
> > in this particular case it makes the feel of a more slow function. I
> > make a clik on a class and i see a little window that appear and
> > dissapear. perhaps is better to no show anything.
> >
>
> I intend to remove this once sufficient improvements have been made. In
> the package I have uploaded it has already been removed to aid testing.
>
> > The other think that I'm thinking, I don't know if it is possible with
> > the OB design, but can you make the calculations in an asynchronic way?
>
> I considered this. Basically, I don't know how to do this with the OB
> infrastructure. Instead I settled for delaying calculation of slow
> protocols until they are clicked on.
>
> For instance, if I browse to Morph in my image I quickly see:
>
> -- long (?) --
> -- uncommented (?) --
> -- debugging (1) --
> -- supplied (?) --
> -- override (43) --
> -- supersend (10) --
> -- local (1213) --
>
> The ?'s indicate that the protocol is slow and has not been calculated
> yet. It will only slow me down if I click on one of them, i.e. if I am
> interested in finding methods which are long, uncommented, supplied or
> required.
>
> If the class is small, say less than 20 selectors, then the protocols
> are calculated as before. This needs some tuning.
>
> As someone who is interested in dynamic protocols, what do you think of
> this?

I really appreciate your work on this project. I believe Dynamic
Protocols can be really appreciated if they are fast and easy to use.
In Visual Works, when we released them, a lot of people told us they
liked it and they start implementing their own protocols.


-- 
Damien Cassou