Self-interest May 2006

self-interest@lists.selflanguage.org

8 participants
7 discussions

Start a nNew thread

SELF ON WINDOWS...HOW ?
by ricardolinerotorres 29 May '06

29 May '06

DOES ANYBODY KNOW A WAY I CAN WORK WITH SELF ON WINDOWS XP ANY SOFTWARE OR TOOL THAT CAN ALLOW ME THAT THANKS....

1 0

SELF ON WINDOWS
by ricardolinerotorres 27 May '06

27 May '06

DOES ANYBODY KNOW WHERE I CAN FIND AND DOWNLOAD SOME SOFTWARE TO WORK SELF LANGUGE ON WINDOWS..... THANXS

1 0

Website on Object Oriented Programming
by computer_websites 25 May '06

25 May '06

This site discusses object oriented programming in the form of questions and answers.

1 0

Re: [self-interest] Klein paper
by Adam Spitz 12 May '06

12 May '06

Good idea! It never even occurred to me, but it should have. I'll be sure to mention future Klein papers here. It's true that our work so far on Klein has been focused on the VM and the development environment for it, rather than on the language. Adam On May 11, 2006, at 1:32 PM, Jecel Assumpcao Jr wrote: > In the Squeak mailing list, Klaus Witzel mentioned the paper > "Constructing a metacircular Virtual machine in an > exploratory programming environment" by David Ungar, Adam Spitz and > Alex > Ausch. > > http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1094865 > > Since I don't have an ACM account I can't see the movie or read it > online, but it was very interesting to read the abstract and I will > certainly look it up the next time I go to the library in one of the > local universities. > > My previous impression was that Klein included changes to the language > while the abstract makes it sound like it is just a different > implementation of the standard Self language. In either case: good > work > guys! > > It would be nice if when someone publishes a paper or thesis > related to > Self they would announce it here. > > -- Jecel

1 0

Klein paper
by Jecel Assumpcao Jr 11 May '06

11 May '06

In the Squeak mailing list, Klaus Witzel mentioned the paper "Constructing a metacircular Virtual machine in an exploratory programming environment" by David Ungar, Adam Spitz and Alex Ausch. http://portal.acm.org/citation.cfm?id=1094865 Since I don't have an ACM account I can't see the movie or read it online, but it was very interesting to read the abstract and I will certainly look it up the next time I go to the library in one of the local universities. My previous impression was that Klein included changes to the language while the abstract makes it sound like it is just a different implementation of the standard Self language. In either case: good work guys! It would be nice if when someone publishes a paper or thesis related to Self they would announce it here. -- Jecel

1 0

RE: [self-interest] Performance figures interesting
by Michael Latta 11 May '06

11 May '06

It is definitely not a good idea to take such a micro benchmark too seriously. This was just what I had available that could be run on this many different Smalltalk VMs. I would think that the two machines are basically well matched in performance, given similar architectures and clock rates for CPU and memory. If anything the Mac should be faster given the 1Ghz FSB per CPU. What did get my attention is that the Self version we have (10 years old) is not keeping up with even the more simple implementations available from Squeak and VisualWorks. I expect that the Klein VM will do better, but even that will only have research level support, so there will be lots of things that never get done. I am struggling with the issues of better technology vs. industry momentum on many levels these days, and this is just one example where the lack of resources seems to be limiting the success of the technically better solution. I like the concept of Self better than Smalltalk (directly manipulating instances rather than all behavior and structure organized into classes), and I much prefer Smalltalk to Java or C#. Unfortunately the expectations on all applications are rising and the Smalltalk based technologies are not keeping pace. The UI frameworks in Smalltalk can not do the things that WPF in C# can do. The level of polish on VisualWorks is not competitive with Eclipse for Java. At the same time I can solve problems faster in Smalltalk and do things that the more mainstream systems can not come close to doing. For Smalltalk to survive it needs better connectivity to other technologies like Java, C#, and web services, and there needs to be more invested into making it competitive in terms of quality and performance. While users do not generally care about what technology a product is built on, the IT department does. In the enterprise space it needs to fit in. In the end-user space it needs to look credible compared to other applications. Morphic under Squeak is the most polished of the UI options for Smalltalk, but does not use native windows, and Visual Works which uses native windows, still has 10 year old refresh bugs that make it look very unprofessional. For standalone computers like you are building Jecel it makes more sense than for applications trying to exist in a Microsoft/IBM dominated world. Smalltalk is what got me into computers, and I have not found anything I like better, I just hope I can find ways to keep using it professionally. Michael -----Original Message----- From: self-interest(a)yahoogroups.com [mailto:self-interest@yahoogroups.com] On Behalf Of Jecel Assumpcao Jr Sent: Tuesday, May 09, 2006 4:54 PM To: self-interest(a)yahoogroups.com Subject: Re: [self-interest] Performance figures interesting Michael Latta wrote on Tue, 9 May 2006 14:08:06 -0700 > Using the tinyBenchmark microbenchmark from Squeak I find > the following figures interesting. I wonder how the Klein VM > will fare? In all cases the benchmark was run several times > to give the VM a chance to cache the compiled version if it so chose. > > 2.0Ghz Pentium/M w/2GB 533Mhz memory That means you are only using the non optimizing compiler. This makes a huge difference. > Squeak > > '327,784,891 bytecodes/sec; 9,379,747 sends/sec' I reformated your numbers to make them easier to read. > VisualWorks > > '859,781,696 bytecodes/sec; 71,069,397 sends/sec' This is very impressive. Note that you would probably get similar numbers using the Exupery compiler for Squeak. > Gemstone/S > > ' 30,563,514 bytecodes/sec; 4,467,145 sends/sec' > > PowerMac G5 2.0Ghz w/4GB 400Mhz memory Ah, so you are using the full compilation technology! Forget my comment above. But it doesn't make sense to compare different language implementations on entirely different machines. > Self > > ' 25,196,850 bytecodes/sec; 879,023 sends/sec' Here are some numbers I had posted at http://minnow.cc.gatech.edu/squeak/768 600MHz Pentium III (bogomips 1193) Squeak 3.2 1,637,886 sends/sec 54,872,936 bytecodes/sec Self 4.2.1 437,065 sends/sec 5,003,187 bytecodes/sec 277MHz Ultra 5 (UltraSparc IIi) Squeak 3.6 671,079 sends/sec 18,065,656 bytecodes/sec Self 4.2.1 15,517,463 sends/sec 93,590,129 bytecodes/sec So while on one machine (without the optimizing compiler) Self was significantly slower than Squeak, on another machine it was just as significantly faster. The total difference between the two machines was a factor of 57 for bytecodes/sec and 87 for sends/sec. But you already knew that it isn't a good idea to take benchmarks too seriously, right? -- Jecel Yahoo! Groups Links

2 2

Performance figures interesting
by Michael Latta 10 May '06

10 May '06

Using the tinyBenchmark microbenchmark from Squeak I find the following figures interesting. I wonder how the Klein VM will fare? In all cases the benchmark was run several times to give the VM a chance to cache the compiled version if it so chose. 2.0Ghz Pentium/M w/2GB 533Mhz memory Squeak '327784891 bytecodes/sec; 9379747 sends/sec' VisualWorks '859781696 bytecodes/sec; 71069397 sends/sec' Gemstone/S ' 30563514 bytecodes/sec; 4467145 sends/sec' PowerMac G5 2.0Ghz w/4GB 400Mhz memory Self ' 25196850 bytecodes/sec; 879023 sends/sec'

4 7

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

2001

2000

1999

1998

1997

1996

1995

1994

1993

1992

1991

1990

Self-interest May 2006