PS: I only saw now that your code runs *much* slower on Chrome, which is
interesting, can you tell what type of code you're running? Is it
especially math-heavy, does it have a lot of 64-bit integer computations?
I would advice to compile your code with optimization on and -g2 (preserves
function names), and then use Chrome's JS profiler (part of Chrome
Developer Tools panel). This should give you an idea what functions are
especially slow and perhaps provide a hint which C/C++ code is the problem.
>From my experience Firefox and Chrome asm.js performance is close enough to
be not noticeable in most 'real world' cases.
Cheers,
-Floh.
Am Dienstag, 11. August 2015 14:33:23 UTC+2 schrieb Laurent Pugin:
>
> Hi,
>
> I am having troubles having asm compiled / running in Chrome. My C++ code
> is compiled with the following emscripten options:
>
> -O3 --memory-init-file 0 \
> -s ASM_JS=1 \
> -s TOTAL_MEMORY=128*1024*1024 \
> -s TOTAL_STACK=64*1024*1024"
>
> In FireFox and IE Edge, I can see in the console the message the asm.js is
> successfully compiled:
>
> 14:04:46.658 Successfully compiled asm.js code (total compilation time
> 605ms; unable to cache asm.js in synchronous scripts; try loading asm.js
> via <script async> or createElement('script'))
>
> However, nothing is shown in Chrome and I think it does not use asm since
> it is then much slower. I have tested on Chrome Version 44.0.2403.130
> (64-bit) on Mac and also on Windows 10. Any idea how to double check if
> Chrome does compile and run as asm? Or what is the issue if it does not?
> Any flag to switch on as for IE Edge?
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Laurent
>
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"emscripten-discuss" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
