| PLEX86 | ||
Why use Open Source when Microsoft products are so cheap... 10015Why use Open Source when Microsoft products are so cheap... 10017 snips You have to quantify it because "slow" is meaningless. I've worked on codebases where, despite distributed compilation and a good number of machines cranking away, compiles require better than...
Which is an absolutely terrible design if it really does behave that way. Why "take that hit" for every single feature the user may or may-not use? It's far better to defer loading a feature until it is actually needed. Take a hypothetical app with 100 features that take 1-4 second each to load. With the OO solution you describe the user would wait 25-seconds during startup for all these features to load. If only 10 of these features actually get used then the 90% of the load time the user spent waiting was a complete waste. Why use Open Source when Microsoft products are so cheap... 10016 The Ghost In The Machine Why would I have to quantify it? My quantification is not your quantification. Munged is not acceptable. Munged does not translate well to... Whereas if you load these features as needed the miniscule 1-4 second delay experienced whenever a feature needs to get loaded is unlikely to even be noticed. This is the exact same arguement that was made a while back for Konqueror vs. Windows Explorer when it comes to drawing the icons. Click on a folder with 10,000 files and which one returns faster. Konqueror goes out to lunch while it generates the icons for all 10,000 files regardless of whether or not it will ever need to display those icons. Explorer only generates the icons for the files that it actually needs to display.
|
||||
Why use Open Source when Microsoft products are so cheap... 10016 Linux Advocacy from Newsgroups The #1 Usenet Provider on the Internet
Why use Open Source when Microsoft products are so cheap... 10014 |
||||