On Tuesday 05 July 2005 01:55 am, Guillaume Laurent wrote: > On Tuesday 05 July 2005 02:18, Silvan wrote: > > You did say to "move it across the composition back and forth a couple of > > times" which I interpreted to mean "drag it from 1 to 100 and back, then > > repeat. That's what I did. From 1 to 100, stop, 100 to 1, stop 1 to > > 100, stop, 100 to 1. That could explain why I'm four times slower if you > > didn't do that much dragging. > > No, look at the number of calls and the time per call.
Oh, right. Well, bleah then, my graphic performance truly sucks, doesn't it? I should compile it that way and run on Mom's 2.6 GHz P4 with a properly configured fairly recent NVIDIA card. One thing Chris said in a private message to me, which I didn't see show up here... He asked if we had compared compiler optimizations. That's a good point. I've got this in the script I source when building: export CXXFLAGS='-g3 -O0 -gstabs+3' I don't even remember why I put that in there, but I'm going to try compiling with default optimizations (-O3 isn't it?) instead and see if that makes any difference. -- Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621 http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/ http://rosegarden.sourceforge.net/tutorial/ ------------------------------------------------------- SF.Net email is sponsored by: Discover Easy Linux Migration Strategies from IBM. Find simple to follow Roadmaps, straightforward articles, informative Webcasts and more! Get everything you need to get up to speed, fast. http://ads.osdn.com/?ad_id=7477&alloc_id=16492&op=click _______________________________________________ Rosegarden-devel mailing list [email protected] - use the link below to unsubscribe https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/rosegarden-devel
