It used to be that performance was a central component of just about every computer project. It had to be; computer time cost so much that wasting it was a real problem. These days, it is so cheap that we tend to be focussed on how to waste it most effectively - should all that power go into interpreter cycles in a high level language (such as Python), into building more robust abstractions for storage (such as SQL databases), or somewhere else entirely? The tradeoff is often stated as computer cycles (cheap) vs programmer cycles (expensive), but I'm not sure that's it entirely; the latter can always be outsourced to China.
So two notes on projects emphasizing performance caught my attention the last couple of days. The first is a criticism of Subversion by Tom Lord, who happens to be the author of Arch, a competing version control system (thanks to jdub for the link). The other is a post by Tim Bray writing about his recent experience writing a performance critical module in C. Both writers have lots of insight and experience, and are worth listening to.
A common element of both posts is how you have to take care to preserve performance in the currently trendy XML world. But one of the interesting things about Tim Bray's experience is that he was still able to get the performance he needed, and not too painfully either.
One of the nice things about XML is that it doesn't force you to work at a high level of abstraction. The spec itself is essentially a bridge between a low-level representation (a sequence of textual bytes in a fairly simple grammar) and a higher-level abstraction (trees of textlike thingies). By contrast, DOM is an abstraction that basically forces you to work at the higher level, with essentially a 1-1 mapping between the things in the abstraction (nodes and so on) and the objects that represent them. If Tim were forced to do his project in DOM, rather than having the choice of using low-level XML tools such as expat and his hand-rolled finite state machine, performance would have suffered unbearably.
The use of XML gives runtime compatibility with tools designed at a higher level of abstraction. In particular, I'm sure Tim could easily describe what his C program does in terms of XML nodes, etc. This used to be central to the craft of programming: take a description of the desired task, and create an efficient implementation of that task. These days, the world is more complex, so trying to figure out what the desired task is takes most of the programmer's time, and, as for efficiency, we can let Moore's Law take care of that.
Designers of abstractions should take this lesson from XML. Being a bridge between two different levels of abstraction is a good thing. A number of my favorite things have that flavor: the Unix process abstraction, the Python/C runtime embedding. Compare the latter with the JVM, which basically forces you to do everything at the higher level of abstraction of the virtual machine.
Lego Bionicle game
The kids stumbled across the Lego Mata Nui Online Game II. It's interesting because it's one of the more intensive uses of 2D graphics I've seen in a while. However, the implementation leaves something to be desired. It's too slow to be playable on the kids' 500MHz iMac, but fine on my dual 1.6GHz Athlon box. Even so, the implementation (in Flash) is a bit flaky.
The storyline is very much reminiscent of those Infocom text-adventure games of the '80s (and of course, today's retro revival), but with prettier graphics, orders of magnitude more computing requirement, and lots more crashing. Other than that, I'm not very knowledgeable about the Myst family of games, but it's probably a direct rip-off^Wtribute.
I've been looking at handheld devices, and have gotten a Sony Clie SJ20 ($100, 160dpi grayscale screen, 33MHz 68000) to play with. This class of machine is just a little too puny to take seriously; int's are 16 bits, you start running into various 64k limitations when you do anything real, and there's no real libc. However, the next generation of Palms is starting to look interesting indeed - these tend to have reasonably fast ARM chips, and the pricing is moving down, likely squeezing out the 68000-based models pretty soon.
High-end Palm 5 devices such as the Sony UX50 are even more interesting, not least because they now have WiFi networking built-in. But the big story for me is the display. The resolution is going up, and they're getting nicer in other ways as well.
Maybe someday, we'll all be running a free environment such as GPE on our handhelds, but in the meantime there's a demand for apps on PalmOS.
I haven't really looked into the build system for PalmOS 5, but it seems a little daunting. In particular, the free tools seem to be lagging the official ones (Mac and Windows only). In an ideal world, building would "just work", but we're certainly not there yet.