Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.sys.acorn.programmer > #940
| From | druck <news@druck.org.uk> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.sys.acorn.programmer |
| Subject | Re: FontV information |
| Date | 2011-10-27 11:08 +0100 |
| Organization | A noiseless patient Spider |
| Message-ID | <j8baie$fdi$1@dont-email.me> (permalink) |
| References | (1 earlier) <9cb14a2752.martin@bach.planiverse.com> <e8df8230-2cb9-4857-94bc-b81c6b757f44@r2g2000vbj.googlegroups.com> <88ee9d2752.martin@bach.planiverse.com> <j8693u$laa$1@dont-email.me> <6d3f302852.martin@bach.planiverse.com> |
On 26/10/2011 12:01, Martin Wuerthner wrote: > I do not think that can have been the reason because there is no > substantial difference between FontV and SpriteV in terms of the > number of calls and the complexity of a single call. Both are > relatively high-level and therefore ideal for vectoring. There are > lots of SWIs that are called much more often and do less per call > (which means the overhead of vectoring is more noticeable) and they > are still vectored, e.g., WrchV. Looking at David Ruck's VecStat, the > number of times WrchV, ByteV, MouseV, ChangeEnvV are called dwarves > the number of SpriteV calls, and FontV would probably be similar. I was surprised by the sheer number of calls per second when I wrote it, following on from SWIstat, APPstat and SERVstat which you can find at http://www.armclub.org.uk/free/ > Interestingly, in a typical desktop environment, it is RemV that is > called most often (around 9 million times in the 10 minutes I spent > writing this message), followed by MouseV, ByteV (5 million), > ChangeEnvV (3 million), WrchV (1.2 million). The number of SpriteV > calls is negligible at 33,000 and FontV would be in that region, too. The overhead for vectorising calls is negligible compared to anything the call actually does, or even the SWI decode and dispatch mechanism itself. ---druck
Back to comp.sys.acorn.programmer | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread
FontV information wpb <w.blatchley@yahoo.com> - 2011-10-24 06:05 -0700
Re: FontV information Martin Wuerthner <spamtrap@mw-software.com> - 2011-10-24 19:14 +0200
Re: FontV information wpb <w.blatchley@yahoo.com> - 2011-10-24 10:31 -0700
Re: FontV information Martin Wuerthner <spamtrap@mw-software.com> - 2011-10-25 10:23 +0200
Re: FontV information John Tytgat <this@is.invalid> - 2011-10-25 14:12 +0200
Re: FontV information Martin Wuerthner <spamtrap@mw-software.com> - 2011-10-26 13:01 +0200
Re: FontV information druck <news@druck.org.uk> - 2011-10-27 11:08 +0100
Re: FontV information wpb <w.blatchley@yahoo.com> - 2011-10-31 00:53 -0700
Re: FontV information John Tytgat <this@is.invalid> - 2011-10-31 11:51 +0100
Re: FontV information Martin Wuerthner <spamtrap@mw-software.com> - 2011-10-31 12:01 +0100
Re: FontV information wpb <w.blatchley@yahoo.com> - 2011-11-07 07:53 -0800
csiph-web