On 23-02-2013, at 11:01 AM, Bert Freudenberg <bert at freudenbergs.de> wrote:

> 
> On 23.02.2013, at 19:24, tim Rowledge <tim at rowledge.org> wrote:
> 
>> 
>> On 23-02-2013, at 5:58 AM, "Juan Vuletich (mail lists)" <juanlists at jvuletich.org> wrote:
>>> What tinyBenchmarks performance do you get?
>> 
>> My Pi does about 42Mbc/s and 1.4Msn/s
> 
> Under Linux, using the pre-installed Squeak VM and the Cuis image, I get 35 Mbytecodes/s and 1.0 Msends/s.
> 
> Guess the Linux VM could use some of your ARM-Fu?


Ouch. That's quite a difference.

>> 
>> Try to get a Pi sometime. You'll adore the sheer cuteness of having a machine that small and raw to play with. Download RISC OS and enjoy a *really fun* operating system as well.
> 
> I'll stick to Linux for the time being :)

Ya big wuss. ;-) Virtual memory etc has made you soft. 

> 
> Well, under MVC, all windows except the active one are dead. In Morphic they're live.

And maybe part of the problem is that not everything *needs* to be alive all the time. Perhaps simply making appropriate morphs 'go zombie' for a while would improve performance? 

> 
> Which is not to say this couldn't be improved: in the Scratch image, opening a browser is almost instantaneous (Scratch: 0.x secs, Etoys: 3 secs, Squeak: 3 secs, Cuis: 6 secs). 

True; on the Pi opening a browser in the Scratch image is near instant. Of course, they're absolutely hideously coloured. In fact, long-dead-zombie colour wouldn't be too inaccurate. Anyone interested in improving browser performance in Morphic should play with the Scratch 'source code release' image and try to bring the latest versions up to that same speed.


tim
--
tim Rowledge; tim at rowledge.org; http://www.rowledge.org/tim
Oxymorons: Almost exactly