July 2011
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
          1 2
3 4 5 6 7 8 9
10 11 12 13 14 15 16
17 18 19 20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28 29 30
31            

April 07, 2003
Optimization-o-rama

So far the biggest downside of using haxies it the impact it brings on application launch time. There's more code to be loaded when an application starts up, and this increases the startup time by some amount of time.

Starting past Friday, I am on the quest of battling this situation, and the results this far are very pleasing. First of all, some enhancements were done to the Application Enhancer system itself, giving some noticable performance boost. Second, I am carefully profiling the code in our haxies, one by one, to make sure they take the least amount of time at the initialization time possible. So far I have done a few changes to WindowShade X and FruitMenu code, managing to make it load 1.5x-2.15x times faster.

There's more profiling to be done, and some beta testing of the new additions to APE, but the future looks pretty good -- I will keep you posted on the progress.

 Posted by slava at 11:58 AM | Comments (6)
Related:
Comments

Awesome, Slava! Any progress on the Minimize In Place for WSX or are you waiting to see if it is included in OS X 10.3?

Posted by: Ken on April 7, 2003 12:47 PM

Great work! Speed is always cool. Hmm, now that you brought up the Haxies - any plans for future versions of Xounds?

Posted by: Andreas Tellefsen on April 7, 2003 1:28 PM

Andreas: yes, Xounds update is queued. Actually, all of the haxies will be updated over time for APE 1.3 (to take advantage of new speed advantages). Old, not updated APE modules will continue to work on APE 1.3, as it's fully backwards compatible.

Posted by: slava on April 7, 2003 2:01 PM

Cool. Can't wait!

Posted by: Jason Anderson on April 7, 2003 6:13 PM

Hey, does Unsanity respond to feedback e-mails, or should I be posting stuff here?

Posted by: Inspired on April 8, 2003 11:58 PM

If you can improve things such that applications launch *faster* with APE+haxies loaded than without, then I think you've got a holy grail product :)

Posted by: Richard Soderberg on April 10, 2003 4:17 AM