The base images are the same (Croquet update 364), and the B3DRotation
classes are identical.

Joshua


On Thu, May 15, 2003 at 04:47:56PM -0400, Joshua 'Schwa' Gargus wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I'm having a weird performance discrepancy between code in two
> different images.  The code is not the same, but the the part that is
> causing the performance hotspot should be.  Here are message tallies
> of the weird parts:
> 
> 	|      43.1% {1162ms} Transform>>transformTransform:
> 	|        29.3% {790ms} B3DRotation>>*
> 	|          |9.0% {243ms} B3DVector3>>cross:
> 	|          |  |3.0% {81ms} B3DVector3>>z
> 	|          |  |2.4% {65ms} B3DVector3>>x
> 	|          |8.4% {226ms} B3DRotation class>>a:b:c:d:
> 	|          |  |7.2% {194ms} B3DRotation>>a:b:c:d:
> 	|          |  |  6.0% {162ms} B3DRotation>>normalize
> 	|          |  |    2.4% {65ms} B3DRotation>>b
> 	|          |5.4% {146ms} B3DRotation>>bcd
> 	|          |  |3.0% {81ms} B3DVector3 class>>x:y:z:
> 	|          |4.2% {113ms} B3DRotation>>a
> 	|        12.6% {340ms} Transform>>transformVector:
> 	|          6.0% {162ms} B3DRotation>>asMatrix4x4
> 	|          3.6% {97ms} B3DMatrix4x4>>localDirToGlobal:
> 	|          2.4% {65ms} B3DVector3(FloatArray)>>*=
> 
> (and the other one)
> 
> 	|        65.8% {4223ms} Transform>>transformTransform:
> 	|          35.4% {2272ms} B3DRotation>>*
> 	|            |13.6% {873ms} B3DVector3>>cross:
> 	|            |  |4.3% {276ms} B3DVector3 class>>x:y:z:
> 	|            |  |  |2.9% {186ms} primitives
> 	|            |  |4.1% {263ms} B3DVector3>>z
> 	|            |  |3.5% {225ms} B3DVector3>>x
> 	|            |11.3% {725ms} B3DRotation class>>a:b:c:d:
> 	|            |  |10.4% {667ms} B3DRotation>>a:b:c:d:
> 	|            |  |  9.6% {616ms} B3DRotation>>normalize
> 	|            |  |    2.6% {167ms} Float(Number)>>squared
> 	|            |3.5% {225ms} B3DRotation>>bcd
> 	|            |  2.9% {186ms} B3DVector3 class>>x:y:z:
> 	|          27.0% {1733ms} Transform>>transformVector:
> 	|            |14.8% {950ms} B3DRotation>>asMatrix4x4
> 	|            |  |4.6% {295ms} B3DRotation>>matrixClass
> 	|            |  |2.3% {148ms} B3DMatrix4x4>>a11:
> 	|            |11.0% {706ms} B3DMatrix4x4>>localDirToGlobal:
> 	|            |  2.6% {167ms} B3DMatrix4x4>>a31
> 	|            |  2.3% {148ms} B3DVector3 class>>x:y:z:
> 	|          2.6% {167ms} Transform>>translation:
> 
> The method Transform>>tranformTransform: is a double dispatch that
> you needn't concern yourself with.  The code for the method is the
> same in both images.  Notice that even though #* is called on 
> B3DRotation the same number of times (I verified this), it takes
> more than twice as long to run in the second image.
> 
> I decided to try to exercise just that method with the following code:
> 
> | b1 b2 |
> b1 := B3DRotation axis: (1 at 4@3) normalized angle: 56.
> b2 := B3DRotation axis: (2 at 5@7) normalized angle: 22.222.
> [30000 timesRepeat: [b1 * b2 * b1 * b2]] timeToRun
> 
> I ran the snippet a bunch of times in both images, and they both
> took roughly the same time.
> 
> I tried garbage-collecting, and restarting each image.  Neither
> made any difference.  Does anyone have any hints about how to 
> approach this?
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Joshua