Weekly edition	Kernel	Security	Distributions	Contact Us	Search
Archives	Calendar	Subscribe	Write for LWN	LWN.net FAQ	Sponsors

Managing GNOME shell extensions

Posted Sep 22, 2011 7:46 UTC (Thu) by niner (subscriber, #26151)
In reply to: Managing GNOME shell extensions by kragilkragil2
Parent article: Managing GNOME shell extensions

Comparing the top output of the example.js from nodejs.org to an equivalent implementation in Perl using HTTP::Server::Simple:
VIRT RES SHR TIME+ COMMAND
614m 9512 4416 0:00.05 node example.js
28932 6408 2660 0:00.04 perl example.pl

node.js not only uses 1 1/2 times the amount of memory compared to perl, it also needed more CPU time for startup and handling a single request returning "Hello world"

So much for lean and fast compared to bloated Perl runtime crap.

(Log in to post comments)

Managing GNOME shell extensions

Posted Sep 22, 2011 8:17 UTC (Thu) by kragilkragil2 (guest, #76172) [Link]

I didn't say that JS was any good, just that there are more resources directed at making it better and that it is _already_running_ and needed in Gnome3. Perl, Python (unless you use some rinter applet), Java etc are not.
So my wish is still just JS extentions nothing else (maybe C and Vala). Everything else is not needed and lets the user experience on resource limited devices deteriorate faster than you get upset when somebody says anything against your favorite scripting language.

Managing GNOME shell extensions

Posted Sep 30, 2011 7:19 UTC (Fri) by jamesh (guest, #1159) [Link]

That isn't a particularly relevant comparison. Gnome Shell already has a JS runtime initialised, so an extension would run within that runtime rather than paying those costs a second time.