> I test on suse 12, and the result is: > > roland@linux-8ssh:/work/fltk-1.3.0/test> ./button > New control cost 0(ms) > Show window cost 341(ms) > roland@linux-8ssh:/work/fltk-1.3.0/test> ./button > New control cost 0(ms) > Show window cost 250(ms) > roland@linux-8ssh:/work/fltk-1.3.0/test> ./button > New control cost 0(ms) > Show window cost 234(ms) > roland@linux-8ssh:/work/fltk-1.3.0/test> ./button > New control cost 0(ms) > Show window cost 208(ms)
Hmm, no, I can't see times that long. I had to tweak the code you posted, it would not compile (the exit and beep cb's were not defined) but my tweaked code yields times of: New control cost 0(ms) Show window cost 34(ms) The "show" cost varies a bit, maybe as low as 30ms or as high as 40ms, but never so long as 200ms... The monitor refresh is 60Hz, so that possibly sets a lower bound of about 17ms for the screen to show anyway. Note that I'm running this in a X server on a WinXP machine, the actual Linux box I test on is about half a kilometre away... I'd assume running it locally on the machine would be even faster. I wonder what is causing the slow response in your tests? On the size front, the static linked, stripped, executable is 262356 bytes - is that OK for size? -- Ian SELEX Galileo Ltd Registered Office: Sigma House, Christopher Martin Road, Basildon, Essex SS14 3EL A company registered in England & Wales. Company no. 02426132 ******************************************************************** This email and any attachments are confidential to the intended recipient and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient please delete it from your system and notify the sender. You should not copy it or use it for any purpose nor disclose or distribute its contents to any other person. ******************************************************************** _______________________________________________ fltk mailing list [email protected] http://lists.easysw.com/mailman/listinfo/fltk
