[Cuis] A few proposed is: additions

[Juan Vuletich]

Hi Phil,

I apologize for taking so long to answer. I took a quick look at your 
code, and I was hoping to integrate it before answering. But I haven't 
done that yet, and I shouldn't delay any longer in answering.

Thank you very much for your code. One thing you made me realize is that 
there is at least one implementor of #is: (CodeProvider) whose answer is 
not "static". This is incompatible with your idea of caching the 
protocols in the class side. But I realized that it was an improper use 
of #is:. That question should be #isRefusingToAccept, with whatever 
needed implementors. So, please give me a little more time to check the 
system and integrate your code.

BTW, can I have your full name? Method #knownInitialsAndNames should 
ideally include the name of all authors of code in the image. Anybody 
else who want their initials / name in the image, please tell. Besides, 
this is nice, because when the system needs your name, if your initials 
are known, it tries to guess, and you can avoid typing your name all the 
time.

Cheers,
Juan Vuletich

Phil (list) wrote:
> ...
> So here I am spit-balling a general notion of how to do it and you get all specific about how to do it even better :-)  Of course you're right about class inst vars being the way to go.
>
>   
>> Besides, it looks a bit complex, but it seems to me that the value is greater than the complexity, so I'd go for it. Mhh. We'd also do some space analysis. I guess we'd be using just a couple of kb of RAM, so it's not an issue, but we should measure anyway.
>>
>>     
>
> Since you've more than pointed me in the right direction, I went ahead and put together a test project to try to answer the memory and performance questions at https://github.com/pbella/Cuis-Experiments .  It implements parallel class hierarchies using the current #is: approach as well as one with the new approach we've been discussing.  Assuming my code is correct, performance varied from 4x faster (#is: checking multiple conditions) to 2.5x slower (simple #is: checks or the condition is matched quickly using the old method (i.e. without needing to walk the class hierarchy)) but you need a lot of iterations to even measure the difference on my machine at least.  Memory usage increased on the order of tens to a few hundred bytes per class (though I'm not sure how accurate the method I'm using is)  How does it look to you?
>
>
>   
> Thanks,
> Phil
> _______________________________________________
> Cuis mailing list
> Cuis at jvuletich.org
> http://jvuletich.org/mailman/listinfo/cuis_jvuletich.org
>
>