Am 24.07.2014 um 16:42 schrieb Sven Van Caekenberghe <s...@stfx.eu>:
>
> On 24 Jul 2014, at 16:34, p...@highoctane.be wrote:
>
>> One question I have is how fast the load of an image and processing by an
>> image is when compared with bash.
>
> Obviously, it is slower, there is a whole image that needs to be loaded, etc.
>
> $ cat test.st
> #!/Users/sven/tmp/pharo4/pharo-vm/Pharo.app/Contents/MacOS/Pharo --headless
> /Users/sven/tmp/pharo4/Pharo.image st --quit
> FileStream stdout nextPutAll: 42 factorial asString; cr.
>
> $ time ./test.st
> 1405006117752879898543142606244511569936384000000000
>
> real 0m0.644s
> user 0m0.516s
> sys 0m0.067s
>
> So about half a second overhead.
>
That#s what I meant
pixelflux:cmdline norbert$ time ./test.st
#('--quit' './test.st')
1405006117752879898543142606244511569936384000000000
real 0m0.414s
user 0m0.284s
sys 0m0.054s
Then I just opened the image executed "ImageCleaner cleanupForProduction" and
saved.
pixelflux:cmdline norbert$ time ./test-cofp.st
#('--quit' './test-cofp.st')
1405006117752879898543142606244511569936384000000000
real 0m0.338s
user 0m0.225s
sys 0m0.051s
If it is an issue at all this is easy to mitigate. A real test would include a
complexer scenario where other files are loaded and this way others would be in
the same range as pharo I guess.
Norbert
