I'm in DrRacket 5.1.3 on Windows 7. I don't know how to report a precise time - is there a way? Absent that I've been going by wall clock and feel. I can't think of anything I've done that ought to cause my zo's to be outdated. If you don't see the same effect, I can install a vanilla version tomorrow or so and see whether its the fault of my configuration. (Can't do it tonight - Irene knocked out Internet access.) (And until I confirm that, I shouldn't have called it a ux bug. Sorry.) -- Pardon terseness and mistakes -- sent from phone. <div class="gmail_quote">On Aug 28, 2011 8:25 PM, "Robby Findler" <<a href="mailto:robby@eecs.northwestern.edu">robby@eecs.northwestern.edu</a>> wrote: > FWIW, this is a way to time what you're saying (I believe -- assuming > you have all your .zos built and you're using a fresh drracket) and > the difference is not as great as that. Unless maybe there's some > reason why that test is different? > > Last login: Sun Aug 28 11:50:09 on ttys001 > [robby@gaoping] ~$ time racket -l racket > > real 0m0.660s > user 0m0.368s > sys 0m0.118s > [robby@gaoping] ~$ time racket -l typed/racket > > real 0m1.031s > user 0m0.719s > sys 0m0.168s > [robby@gaoping] ~$ > > > On Sun, Aug 28, 2011 at 7:20 PM, Shriram Krishnamurthi <<a href="mailto:sk@cs.brown.edu">sk@cs.brown.edu</a>> wrote: >> In a blank #lang racket buffer, if I hit F5, I get a repl cursor almost >> instantaneously. If I do the same in typed/racket, it takes roughly three >> seconds every time. This can't be blamed on parse time since the buffer is >> empty! What gives? (And Sam, do you regard this as a ux bug?) >> >> -- >> Pardon terseness and mistakes -- sent from phone. >> >> _________________________________________________ >> For list-related administrative tasks: >> <a href="http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users">http://lists.racket-lang.org/listinfo/users</a> >> </div>