Re: [Rd] slow tcl/tk

From: John Fox <jfox_at_mcmaster.ca>
Date: Wed, 31 Oct 2007 11:12:57 -0400


Dear Peter,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: r-devel-bounces_at_r-project.org
> [mailto:r-devel-bounces_at_r-project.org] On Behalf Of Peter Dalgaard
> Sent: Wednesday, October 31, 2007 9:54 AM
> To: Adrian Dusa
> Cc: r-devel_at_r-project.org
> Subject: Re: [Rd] slow tcl/tk
>
> Adrian Dusa wrote:
> > Dear list,
> >
> > Building my QCAGUI package using Rcmdr 1.3.0, under R 2.6.0 (using
> > Kubuntu
> > Gutsy) I noticed the library starts visibly slower than...
> somewhere
> > in the past.
> >
> > I used the same version of Rcmdr under previous versions of
> R and the
> > tcl/tk window used to open instantly. Under the current version
> > though, the window take seconds to open: first it builds the base
> > window, then the menus and finally the complete window.
> >
> > The whole process takes about five seconds.
> > I don't think it has anything to do with the Linux version,
> because I
> > noticed the same behavior under the previous one as well.
> >
> > Is there something changed about tcl/tk in R 2.6.0?
> >
> >
> Hmm, there's an event loop messup which was fixed in
> R-patched. The main effect of that one was that scrollbars
> could go crazy. Not sure whether it might cause your kind of
> symptoms, but you might check out the fixed version.
>
> It doesn't seem to make much of a difference here. Rather, I
> suspect that Rcmdr itself got changed and a number of things
> that used to be fixed are now generated programmatically.

It's possible that I'm missing something, but I don't think that there have been recent changes to the Rcmdr that would account for this difference (and note that I don't see it under Windows). In particular, I think that the change coincided with R-2.6.0 (which seems to be Adrian's experience too).

> There's certainly a lot of
> eval(parse(...)) stuff going on. (This sort of code always
> makes me a little suspicious, but I haven't by far studied it
> well enough to say whether there might be a more efficient way.)

The awkward eval-parses have always been there. There's probably a better way to do at least some of this, but I haven't been able to think of it.

Regards,
 John

>
> > Thanks in advance,
> > Adrian
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> O__ ---- Peter Dalgaard ุster Farimagsgade 5, Entr.B
> c/ /'_ --- Dept. of Biostatistics PO Box 2099, 1014 Cph. K
> (*) \(*) -- University of Copenhagen Denmark Ph:
> (+45) 35327918
> ~~~~~~~~~~ - (p.dalgaard_at_biostat.ku.dk) FAX:
> (+45) 35327907
>
> ______________________________________________
> R-devel_at_r-project.org mailing list
> https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel
>



R-devel_at_r-project.org mailing list
https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel Received on Wed 31 Oct 2007 - 15:31:56 GMT

Archive maintained by Robert King, hosted by the discipline of statistics at the University of Newcastle, Australia.
Archive generated by hypermail 2.2.0, at Wed 31 Oct 2007 - 17:30:13 GMT.

Mailing list information is available at https://stat.ethz.ch/mailman/listinfo/r-devel. Please read the posting guide before posting to the list.