Path: csiph.com!usenet.pasdenom.info!bete-des-vosges.org!news.redatomik.org!newsfeed.xs4all.nl!newsfeed2.news.xs4all.nl!xs4all!newsgate.cistron.nl!newsgate.news.xs4all.nl!post.news.xs4all.nl!not-for-mail Return-Path: X-Original-To: python-list@python.org Delivered-To: python-list@mail.python.org X-Spam-Status: OK 0.003 X-Spam-Evidence: '*H*': 0.99; '*S*': 0.00; 'programmer': 0.03; 'startup': 0.05; 'subject:text': 0.05; 'cache': 0.07; 'mentioned,': 0.07; 'suppose': 0.07; '128': 0.09; 'function,': 0.09; 'observation': 0.09; 'subject:question': 0.10; 'python': 0.11; 'background.': 0.14; 'sections': 0.14; '(yes': 0.16; 'downside': 0.16; 'editor,': 0.16; 'expecting': 0.16; 'from:addr:mrabarnett.plus.com': 0.16; 'from:addr:python': 0.16; 'from:name:mrab': 0.16; 'guilty': 0.16; 'libre': 0.16; 'message- id:@mrabarnett.plus.com': 0.16; 'once.': 0.16; 'output?': 0.16; 'rarely': 0.16; 'received:192.168.1.4': 0.16; 'sat,': 0.16; ':-)': 0.16; 'wrote:': 0.18; 'code.': 0.18; 'bit': 0.19; 'file,': 0.19; 'slightly': 0.19; 'examples': 0.20; 'feb': 0.22; '>>>': 0.22; 'memory': 0.22; 'example': 0.22; 'separate': 0.22; 'load': 0.23; 'header:User-Agent:1': 0.23; 'bytes': 0.24; 'merge': 0.24; 'sort': 0.25; 'least': 0.26; 'asking': 0.27; 'header:In-Reply-To:1': 0.27; 'rest': 0.29; 'chris': 0.29; 'feature': 0.29; '[1]': 0.29; 'am,': 0.29; 'work.': 0.31; '(perhaps': 0.31; 'faster,': 0.31; 'invoke': 0.31; 'loading': 0.31; 'loads': 0.31; 'secondly': 0.31; 'suites': 0.31; 'probably': 0.32; 'another': 0.32; 'text': 0.33; 'running': 0.33; 'ago': 0.33; 'programmers': 0.33; 'maybe': 0.34; 'could': 0.34; 'basic': 0.35; 'editor': 0.35; 'but': 0.35; 'there': 0.35; 'date.': 0.36; 'disk': 0.36; 'ram': 0.36; "didn't": 0.36; 'application': 0.37; 'so,': 0.37; 'implement': 0.38; 'sometimes': 0.38; 'bringing': 0.38; 'to:addr:python-list': 0.38; 'rather': 0.38; 'does': 0.39; 'generating': 0.39; 'to:addr:python.org': 0.39; 'enough': 0.39; 'easy': 0.60; 'office': 0.60; 'course': 0.61; 'simple': 0.61; "you're": 0.61; 'first': 0.61; 'you.': 0.62; 'back': 0.62; 'soon': 0.63; 'for:': 0.64; 'office,': 0.64; 'become': 0.64; 'more': 0.64; 'within': 0.65; 'here': 0.66; 'yes': 0.68; 'rendering': 0.68; 'increase': 0.74; 'yourself': 0.78; '2015': 0.84; '3:00': 0.84; 'complexity': 0.84; 'everything,': 0.84; 'footprint': 0.84; 'routines': 0.84; 'usage.': 0.84; 'working,': 0.84; 'demand': 0.91 X-CM-Score: 0.00 X-CNFS-Analysis: v=2.1 cv=Ms/c6gqe c=1 sm=1 tr=0 a=0nF1XD0wxitMEM03M9B4ZQ==:117 a=0nF1XD0wxitMEM03M9B4ZQ==:17 a=0Bzu9jTXAAAA:8 a=mlFM_a_ONtUA:10 a=IkcTkHD0fZMA:10 a=EBOSESyhAAAA:8 a=NLZqzBF-AAAA:8 a=3tsMXN91nfMtDAQwwhkA:9 a=QEXdDO2ut3YA:10 X-AUTH: mrabarnett@:2500 Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2015 19:14:00 +0000 From: MRAB User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.3; WOW64; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: python-list@python.org Subject: Re: Newbie question about text encoding References: <54ECB134.5090304@davea.name> <201502241945.t1OJjshO013092@fido.openend.se> <201502241957.t1OJvrJS015604@fido.openend.se> <00fbd940-52f6-44e2-bf08-b9f35c12e73f@googlegroups.com> <54efc2c8$0$12986$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <54f00787$0$12979$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <54f05aff$0$12980$c3e8da3$5496439d@news.astraweb.com> <54F078FD.5030801@davea.name> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-BeenThere: python-list@python.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15 Precedence: list List-Id: General discussion list for the Python programming language List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Newsgroups: comp.lang.python Message-ID: Lines: 54 NNTP-Posting-Host: 2001:888:2000:d::a6 X-Trace: 1425064451 news.xs4all.nl 2959 [2001:888:2000:d::a6]:45022 X-Complaints-To: abuse@xs4all.nl Xref: csiph.com comp.lang.python:86584 On 2015-02-27 16:45, alister wrote: > On Sat, 28 Feb 2015 03:12:16 +1100, Chris Angelico wrote: > >> On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 3:00 AM, alister >> wrote: >>> I think there is a case for bringing back the overlay file, or at least >>> loading larger programs in sections only loading the routines as they >>> are required could speed up the start time of many large applications. >>> examples libre office, I rarely need the mail merge function, the word >>> count and may other features that could be added into the running >>> application on demand rather than all at once. >> >> Downside of that is twofold: firstly the complexity that I already >> mentioned, and secondly you pay the startup cost on first usage. So you >> might get into the program a bit faster, but as soon as you go to any >> feature you didn't already hit this session, the program pauses for a >> bit and loads it. Sometimes startup cost is the best time to do this >> sort of thing. >> > If the modules are small enough this may not be noticeable but yes I do > accept there may be delays on first usage. > I suppose you could load the basic parts first so that the user can start working, and then load the additional features in the background. > As to the complexity it has been my observation that as the memory > footprint available to programmers has increase they have become less & > less skilled at writing code. > > of course my time as a professional programmer was over 20 years ago on 8 > bit micro controllers with 8k of ROM (eventually, original I only had 2k > to play with) & 128 Bytes (yes bytes!) of RAM so I am very out of date. > > I now play with python because it is so much less demanding of me which > probably makes me just a guilty :-) > >> Of course, there is an easy way to implement exactly what you're asking >> for: use separate programs for everything, instead of expecting a >> megantic office suite[1] to do everything for you. Just get yourself a >> nice simple text editor, then invoke other programs - maybe from a >> terminal, or maybe from within the editor - to do the rest of the work. >> A simple disk cache will mean that previously-used programs start up >> quickly. > Libre office was sighted as just one example > Video editing suites are another that could be used as an example > (perhaps more so, does the rendering engine need to be loaded until you > start generating the output? a small delay here would be insignificant) >> >> ChrisA >> >> [1] It's slightly less bloated than the gigantic office suite sold by a >> top-end software company. >