Am Sonntag, 10. August 2003 19:09 schrieb Andreas Raab:
> Most likely XDrawArc is an extremely bad method to call for profiling this.
> Note that drawing an arc is very unlikely to be a highly optimized method
> for zero area arcs (why would you do this to begin with?) and it also
> possibly requires a trip through the X server.
> If you want to measure the
> difference you should use a method which you know returns pretty much
> immediately. For examples, the ffi test methods (such as ffiTestInts,
> ffiTestFloats or ffiPrintString) might be better. Here, you know what will
> be happening.

I would have done so if these calls worked for me. These functions do reside 
inside the vm in the SqueakFFIPrims plugin, but "FFITester ffiPrintString: 
'Hello'" still fails and I haven't figured out why that happens yet.
Calls to the libX11 do work and so I used XDrawArc for the profiling. Because
drawing a well formed circle with XDrawArc takes about 30 times longer then in 
the degenerated case, I assumed the xlib function checked parameters and 
would return immediately. So I though it might not be an ideal candidate for 
profiling, but considering the circumstances good enough. I just looked into 
the source for XDrawArc and there is no parameter checking. Mhhh...

...

Ok, I think it's better to see why the ffiTestXYZ calls don't work and do some 
profiling using one of those.

Alex
-- 
Sommerpause: "Sommerpause heißt bei uns: man muss zum Grillen und Biertrinken 
nicht mehr ins Büro fahren." -- Harald Schmidt