Hi Helge and Gregory,
I use (spend about 12 hours compiling GCC) and compiled GNUstep with
that, so I'm guessing it's linking to GNU.
By comparing the output of the Cocoa with GNUstep binary you should
also be able to tell why GNUstep performs better in your specific
case.
This would be interesting, I'll have a look.
It would be really nice to do some concrete tests to get some real
numbers on this.
Yeah, what do you propose? Making sure that nothing is running in
MacOS's background that could make the number different, do mulitiple
runs... that kind of thing? Or are you thinking of 'bench-marking
software'?
It is very easy for me to make the calculations longer (several
mins.) when I get time I will do a longer run to see if Cocoa can
catch up.
Dan.
On 3 Oct 2006, at 19:24, Helge Hess wrote:
On Oct 3, 2006, at 18:17, Daniel J Farrell wrote:
Now, not a true test by any means just a tentative suggestion from
a large command line app. The app is basically a scientific number
cruncher. I have run the same code, on the same computer, one
compiled in xcode linking to Cocoa Foundation and the other
compiled using gcc make, make install, openapp etc. linked to
GNUstep Base. The GNUstep version is 50% faster (47.8% increase to
be more precise).
Does GNUstep-base work with the Apple runtime or do you use the GNU
Objective-C runtime?
If you want to further optimize the issue you should have a look in
Shark. By comparing the output of the Cocoa with GNUstep binary you
should also be able to tell why GNUstep performs better in your
specific case.
Thanks,
Helge
--
Helge Hess
http://docs.opengroupware.org/Members/helge/
_______________________________________________
Gnustep-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
_______________________________________________
Gnustep-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnustep-dev
