Home » Eclipse Projects » Eclipse Platform » performances
| performances [message #215212] |
Wed, 24 March 2004 07:32  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: skonx.yahoo.com
I find Eclipse very weel. But I find the overall performances quite bad. I
use Eclipse3M7, I've a Pentium4 512MB memory, 128MB videomemory, ... , and
the opening a workbench is quite slow, the feel is often sticky ...
So I can remember when I was staring a smalltalk image(parcplace) ,
everrthing was quick, smotth, and so on... And the overall tool was quite
small too (les than 10MB, virtual machine and classes)... It is like
Windows ; more the time goes, more ressources we need ...
I know I'm a little bit unfair ;) but seriously, why Java 10 years later
is still slower than Smalltalk?
|
|
|
| Re: performances [message #215224 is a reply to message #215212] |
Wed, 24 March 2004 07:56  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: hcs33.egon.gyaloglo.hu
Hi,
Do you use -vmargs to specify memory parameters for the jvm which runs
Eclipse? If not, you should. In http://eclipsewiki.swiki.net/2614 there are
a plenty of tips which you can try to increase performance.
I use Eclipse 3.0M7 in a P4Celeron with 512MB memory and it is very usable.
HTH,
Regards,
Csaba
"skonx" <skonx@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:c3rdht$u5e$1@eclipse.org...
> I find Eclipse very weel. But I find the overall performances quite bad. I
> use Eclipse3M7, I've a Pentium4 512MB memory, 128MB videomemory, ... , and
> the opening a workbench is quite slow, the feel is often sticky ...
> So I can remember when I was staring a smalltalk image(parcplace) ,
> everrthing was quick, smotth, and so on... And the overall tool was quite
> small too (les than 10MB, virtual machine and classes)... It is like
> Windows ; more the time goes, more ressources we need ...
> I know I'm a little bit unfair ;) but seriously, why Java 10 years later
> is still slower than Smalltalk?
>
>
|
|
|
| Re: performances [message #215232 is a reply to message #215224] |
Wed, 24 March 2004 09:06 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: skonx.yahoo.com
Thanks Csaba...It is more quicker than previously... It should be maybe
the default configuration ;)
> Hi,
> Do you use -vmargs to specify memory parameters for the jvm which runs
> Eclipse? If not, you should. In http://eclipsewiki.swiki.net/2614 there are
> a plenty of tips which you can try to increase performance.
> I use Eclipse 3.0M7 in a P4Celeron with 512MB memory and it is very usable.
> HTH,
> Regards,
> Csaba
> "skonx" <skonx@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:c3rdht$u5e$1@eclipse.org...
> > I find Eclipse very weel. But I find the overall performances quite bad. I
> > use Eclipse3M7, I've a Pentium4 512MB memory, 128MB videomemory, ... , and
> > the opening a workbench is quite slow, the feel is often sticky ...
> > So I can remember when I was staring a smalltalk image(parcplace) ,
> > everrthing was quick, smotth, and so on... And the overall tool was quite
> > small too (les than 10MB, virtual machine and classes)... It is like
> > Windows ; more the time goes, more ressources we need ...
> > I know I'm a little bit unfair ;) but seriously, why Java 10 years later
> > is still slower than Smalltalk?
> >
> >
|
|
|
| Re: performances [message #215285 is a reply to message #215224] |
Wed, 24 March 2004 11:43 |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Originally posted by: user.domain.invalid
P4Celeron?!
Horváth, Csaba wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Do you use -vmargs to specify memory parameters for the jvm which runs
> Eclipse? If not, you should. In http://eclipsewiki.swiki.net/2614 there are
> a plenty of tips which you can try to increase performance.
> I use Eclipse 3.0M7 in a P4Celeron with 512MB memory and it is very usable.
>
> HTH,
> Regards,
> Csaba
>
> "skonx" <skonx@yahoo.com> wrote in message news:c3rdht$u5e$1@eclipse.org...
>
>>I find Eclipse very weel. But I find the overall performances quite bad. I
>>use Eclipse3M7, I've a Pentium4 512MB memory, 128MB videomemory, ... , and
>>the opening a workbench is quite slow, the feel is often sticky ...
>>So I can remember when I was staring a smalltalk image(parcplace) ,
>>everrthing was quick, smotth, and so on... And the overall tool was quite
>>small too (les than 10MB, virtual machine and classes)... It is like
>>Windows ; more the time goes, more ressources we need ...
>>I know I'm a little bit unfair ;) but seriously, why Java 10 years later
>>is still slower than Smalltalk?
>>
>>
>
>
>
|
|
|
Goto Forum:
Current Time: Fri Sep 20 13:34:17 GMT 2024
Powered by FUDForum. Page generated in 0.03810 seconds |
] 
Search
Help
Register
Login
Home
