Hi Max,

I'd be interested to learn how you are using ImageSegments. Is it
using CodeLoader?

- Bert -

On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 9:08 PM, Max Leske <maxleske at gmail.com> wrote:

> Hi Eliot,
>
> On 22 Sep 2016, at 20:46, Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Max,
>
> On Thu, Sep 22, 2016 at 11:42 AM, Max Leske <maxleske at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On 22 Sep 2016, at 20:28, Eliot Miranda <eliot.miranda at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Bert, Hi All,
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 15, 2016 at 2:55 PM,  <commits at source.squeak.org> wrote:
>> [snip]
>>
>>> http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/packages/2016-Se
>>> ptember/068930.html
>>>
>>> Name: System-bf.916
>>> Ancestors: System-bf.915
>>>
>>> Replace VM-level ImageSegment loading with a Smalltalk implementation
>>> for old (interpreter-era) projects.
>>>
>>> Also removes support for writing segments.
>>>
>>> This overrides the Spur support introduced in System-eem.758.
>>>
>>
>>  So one question is should we delete VM support for ImageSegment from the
>> Spur VM?  There's at least 1.5k of generated source for the Spur
>> ImageSegment load and save support, some 2% of the interpreter/primitives
>> source code.  That's a lot, and the code is complex and ugly.  If it never
>> really worked before IMO we should nuke it asap.  If it worked in some
>> fashion perhaps we can schedule its demise for the 6.0 release's VM.
>>
>> What do others think?
>>
>>
>> As long as you don’t remove it from the Cog VM’s until I no longer need
>> it I’m fine with that.
>>
>
> And when would that be?
>
>
> Can’t really say but I'm hoping to get rid of ImageSegment within the next
> 2 years (very rough estimate).
>
>   Do you mean that you use it in ways not covered by Bert's modifications
> (which render the VM support superfluous), or do you mean that you use
> ImageSegment as a naive consumer and are happy just so long as it works?
>
>
> Speed is important to me, as I use ImageSegment to create snapshots of our
> applications (and hence I need write support, which Bert apparently
> removed). Those snapshots can exceed 90 MB and the graphs include thousands
> of objects. I fear that a pure Smalltalk implementation would not be fast
> enough.
>
>
> On the other hand, we would simply not move to a VM version without
> ImageSegment support, so that case may give me the boost I need to get rid
> of ImageSegment :) Currently we’re preparing to move to our first Cog VM in
> production. If you can give me 2 or 3 months, so that I know the version we
> use works for us, you could then remove ImageSegment support and we would
> start replacing ImageSegment with something else so we could keep updating
> our VM.
>
> Cheers,
> Max
>
>
>
>>
>> Max
>>
>>
>> _,,,^..^,,,_
>> best, Eliot
>>
>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> _,,,^..^,,,_
> best, Eliot
>
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20160926/34868e55/attachment.htm