compileIt for revolution?

[Jon]

With all due respect, Jim, if you are trying to do even simple math on a 
large array of numbers (like computing a histogram of image data), Rev 
is simply too slow to use.  It has nothing to do with data structures: 
it has to do with slow pCode trying to run tight loops.

Jon

Jim Bufalini wrote:

>Guess I'll add my two cents.
>
>I'm a newbie to "Rev" (Revolution) but worked over 25 years in "Rev"
>(Revelation), another similar, high-typed, extensible, flexible, run as you
>program, script language. It's an implementation of Pick on the PC. I was
>considered an expert. I also owned a company and employed programmers.
>
>I too, have heard these discussions hundreds of times, over the years.
>
>Speed of execution rarely relates to code, or the language, or whether it's
>compiled, or in pcode or whatever. It always has to do with data, whether
>the data is in arrays, or a database, or whatever object. Any language can
>add 2 to 2 instantly, regardless of the syntax.
>
>You don't get speed by changing languages, or writing lengthy workarounds,
>or complaining about your tools. You get speed by designing, in advance, the
>layout of your data.
>
>This requires straight thinking. 1. Know what you are setting out to
>accomplish before you type one character of code (what are your client's
>(your) goals?). 2. Layout and optimize the data you are going to access
>BEFORE writing any code. How are you indexing the data? Is it real indexing
>or organization? 3. Now write your code. If you find yourself writing
>spaghetti code, STOP, go back to step 1.
>
>Jim
>
>-----Original Message-----
>From: use-revolution-bounces at lists.runrev.com
>[mailto:use-revolution-bounces at lists.runrev.com]On Behalf Of Dan Shafer
>Sent: Wednesday, June 22, 2005 12:12 PM
>To: How to use Revolution
>Subject: Re: compileIt for revolution?
>
>
>This whole discussion has been revealing and intriguing to me.
>
>My favorite programming language is Smalltalk. But before it was
>possible to create UIs for Smalltalk without writing code, I found it
>cumbersome. When a product called WindowBuilder came along, I felt
>like we'd achieved the ultimate development environment. In many
>ways, I still think that. Smalltalk had other problems,
>unfortunately, that made it great to code in, difficult to impossible
>to deploy.
>
>Then my second favorite language was Python. The GUI-building tools
>for Python are pathetic to non-existent. But the language is powerful
>and elegant and extends naturally. If the PythonCard project I was
>engaged in before I discovered Revolution had been on a fast track or
>complete, odds are I'd have never used Rev.
>
>Now I favor Transcript and RunRev. Building UIs is all but painless
>and 95% of what I want or need to do in creating apps is simple
>inside the elegance of Transcript. But Transcript isn't  object-
>oriented.
>
>Two aphorisms came to mind as I read this entire thread again today.
>
>One is, "No good programmer uses only one tool for everything."
>
>The other is, "It's a poor workman who blames his tools."
>
>
>
>
>~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
>Dan Shafer, Revolution Consultant and Author
>http://www.shafermedia.com
>Get my book, "Revolution: Software at the Speed of Thought"
> From http://www.shafermedia.com/revolutionbooks.html
>
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>use-revolution mailing list
>use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
>Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription
>preferences:
>http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
>
>
>
>_______________________________________________
>use-revolution mailing list
>use-revolution at lists.runrev.com
>Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
>http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-revolution
>
>
>  
>