Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-18 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:

 The huge benefit of LCL-fpGUI will be bug fixing and
 feature support. No need to limit the widget set to a specific version
 of the GUI toolkit. Plus if there is a bug or some implementation
 difference in fpGUI it could easily be tweaked, whereas with GTK2, Qt
 etc you are out of luck.

I might be missing something, but I've just noticed that gtk flatly 
refuses to allow Lazarus programs to be run setuid. Now I see that 
http://www.gtk.org/setuid.html gives adequate reasons why this is 
deprecated but there are cases where it is valuable at least during 
development, and if fpGUI could exploit this niche it could be useful.

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-18 Thread Graeme Geldenhuys
On Tue, Nov 18, 2008 at 1:21 PM, Mark Morgan Lloyd
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I might be missing something, but I've just noticed that gtk flatly
 refuses to allow Lazarus programs to be run setuid. Now I see that
 http://www.gtk.org/setuid.html gives adequate reasons why this is
 deprecated but there are cases where it is valuable at least during
 development, and if fpGUI could exploit this niche it could be useful.

I've added this to my todo list so I don't forget and will looking
into it later. I can't give it attention now, as I have urgent
deadlines at my company that needs attention first.


Regards,
  - Graeme -


___
fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit
http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-17 Thread Luiz Americo Pereira Camara
Aleš Katona escreveu:
 Note also the Vampyre imaging library which is pure pascal and supports a 
 wide variety of image formats (both loading and saving).

 I think it's a sort of gaming lib but nothing prevents other uses.

 http://imaginglib.sourceforge.net/

   

I already created a fpGui component to display images using imaging.

The component code: https://luipack.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/luicairo/
The demo: 
https://luipack.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/luicairo/demos/luiimage_fpgui
It needs cairo_base, cairo_fpgui, cairo_imaging packages found at: 
https://luipack.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/cairo
It needs imaging. Tested with version 0.24. See readme at 
https://luipack.googlecode.com/svn/trunk/luipack\cairo\imaging\extra

Luiz

___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-14 Thread Marc Weustink
Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
 Luiz Americo Pereira Camara wrote:
 Mark Morgan Lloyd escreveu:
 Having said that I want to try to get 0.9.27 onto my remaining available 
 SPARC system, I'm very worried at the prospect of being marooned with 
 gtk1 on 0.9.24 while the rest of the World moves on

 Did you tried to compile/use 0.9.27 with gtk1? It still possible to do 
 that. No need to switch to older versions of Lazarus/fpc.
 
 The current situation with 0.9.27+2.2.3 on SPARC appears to be as below.
 
 gtk1: Bus error in object inspector attempting to create an event handler.
 
 gtk2: IDE operation appears OK but bus error during compilation.
 
 Both raise an exception and fail to exit (I also see this on ARM).

Strange, I woukld expect the buserrors independent of widgetset. Setting 
an eventhandler is something IDE code does and it doesn't need a 
widgetset for that.

 I'm afraid I don't have backtraces for these, I need to get a copy of 
 0.9.27 onto a more accessible development machine- something I'm happier 
 doing now that my desk system is back on a usable 0.9.24.
 
 Unfortunately my fastest SPARC only has gtk1 on it- I could probably fix 
 that by changing distro but there's only so many problems I can cope 
 with at one time.
 
 I'll try to get onto this in a few days but I'm likely to need some 
 help. Please don't kick me too hard :-)

:)

Marc

___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-14 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:

 Excellent. :-)  Could you pass on those changes to extrafpc.cfg, so I
 can add it in.

Working from memory, -Fu../lib becomes -Fu../lib/sparc-linux

Noting that Lazarus has the option of building with fpgui, what's the 
current situation- does anything at all functional come out of it? The 
option could be useful when I buckle down to look at the 0.9.27+SPARC issue.

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-14 Thread Henry Vermaak
2008/11/14 Mark Morgan Lloyd [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:

 Excellent. :-)  Could you pass on those changes to extrafpc.cfg, so I
 can add it in.

 Working from memory, -Fu../lib becomes -Fu../lib/sparc-linux

the extrafpc.cfg files still need to be changed for the examples, i think.

it should be something along the lines of -Fu../lib/$fpctarget/fpgui

henry
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-14 Thread Graeme Geldenhuys
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 11:28 AM, Mark Morgan Lloyd
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Working from memory, -Fu../lib becomes -Fu../lib/sparc-linux

Thanks. In recent revisions of fpGUI repository I changed the output
directory to use CPU-Target instead of hard-coding the output. This is
very handy for sharing the same code directory between VMWare sessions
or cross-compiling.  I must have forgotten to update those files.

 Noting that Lazarus has the option of building with fpgui, what's the
 current situation- does anything at all functional come out of it? The
 option could be useful when I buckle down to look at the 0.9.27+SPARC issue.

The LCL-fpGUI widgetset is just a test case at the moment or a
placeholder.  The code that exists at the moment is simply to evaluate
how easy such an integration will be, so there is no usable code
really. Last time I checked, only TButton, TForm and TEdit was
implemented. This will change in the coming year when I start actively
work in LCL-fpGUI.


Regards,
  - Graeme -


___
fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit
http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-14 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:

 or cross-compiling.  I must have forgotten to update those files.
 
 All extrafpc.cfg files have been updated in the latest fpGUI trunk
 revision. So it should now compile out of the box.

Apropos cross-compiling and noting that I was using a big-endian 
processor, I did notice that the uidesigner icons were blank but didn't 
want to mention it until I'd got x86 and SPARC working in parallel so 
knew what was expected.

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-14 Thread Graeme Geldenhuys
On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 1:47 PM, Mark Morgan Lloyd 
 Apropos cross-compiling and noting that I was using a big-endian
 processor, I did notice that the uidesigner icons were blank but didn't
 want to mention it until I'd got x86 and SPARC working in parallel so
 knew what was expected.

Images support in fpGUI is very basic. In only supports limited format
BMP files.  Does 'fpimage' included in Free Pascal and used by Lazarus
LCL I believe work?  If so, then the fpGUI image issues should be
resolved when I start implementing fpcanvas and fpimage support into
fpGUI early next year.


Regards,
  - Graeme -


___
fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit
http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-14 Thread Michael Van Canneyt


On Fri, 14 Nov 2008, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:

 On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 1:47 PM, Mark Morgan Lloyd 
  Apropos cross-compiling and noting that I was using a big-endian
  processor, I did notice that the uidesigner icons were blank but didn't
  want to mention it until I'd got x86 and SPARC working in parallel so
  knew what was expected.
 
 Images support in fpGUI is very basic. In only supports limited format
 BMP files.  Does 'fpimage' included in Free Pascal and used by Lazarus
 LCL I believe work?  If so, then the fpGUI image issues should be
 resolved when I start implementing fpcanvas and fpimage support into
 fpGUI early next year.

Lazarus uses fpimage for quite a few formats. 
If that works, then it should work for fpGUI too...

Michael.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-14 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Michael Van Canneyt wrote:
 On Fri, 14 Nov 2008, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
 
 On Fri, Nov 14, 2008 at 1:47 PM, Mark Morgan Lloyd 
 Apropos cross-compiling and noting that I was using a big-endian
 processor, I did notice that the uidesigner icons were blank but didn't
 want to mention it until I'd got x86 and SPARC working in parallel so
 knew what was expected.
 Images support in fpGUI is very basic. In only supports limited format
 BMP files.  Does 'fpimage' included in Free Pascal and used by Lazarus
 LCL I believe work?  If so, then the fpGUI image issues should be
 resolved when I start implementing fpcanvas and fpimage support into
 fpGUI early next year.
 
 Lazarus uses fpimage for quite a few formats. 
 If that works, then it should work for fpGUI too...

I think this is something that I explicitly need to check in parallel on 
SPARC and x86. In 0.9.24 on SPARC there is /something/ that raises an 
exception if the IDE auto-opens forms, I've suspected something to do 
with glyph handling but have never been able to track it down. Somebody- 
if I remember correctly- said they didn't see this on PowerPC which like 
SPARC is big-endian.

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-14 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:

 Images support in fpGUI is very basic. In only supports limited format
 BMP files.  Does 'fpimage' included in Free Pascal and used by Lazarus
 LCL I believe work?  If so, then the fpGUI image issues should be
 resolved when I start implementing fpcanvas and fpimage support into
 fpGUI early next year.

Ungh- I'm going to have to set up a to-do list :-)

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-13 Thread Aleš Katona
On Wed, 12 Nov 2008 10:21:16 +
Mark Morgan Lloyd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 
 Fair enough, but I think that puts me in a position that I need to state 
 my policy and that of the people I work for and with.
 
 My policy is that I would prefer to build up enough competence in 
 Lazarus and FPC to be able to make a worthwhile contribution to them.
 
 Our policy is that we don't want to be forced into supplying equipment 
 and services to our customers which carry unfavourable technical and 
 contractual baggage. Roughly translated, we don't want to embed MS OSes 
 in x86 kit unless it really is inevitable :-)
 
 We need to eat, and if it gets to the point where the time I'm putting 
 into dragging myself painfully up the learning curve prevents me from 
 doing concrete development and system management that is going to be a 
 problem. Fortunately I don't think we're particularly near that, but I 
 regularly find that real work intervenes in things that are far more 
 interesting and knocks me offline for days or weeks.
 
 I think you are being slightly unfair characterising Lazarus, and by 
 extension other open-source projects, as being driven entirely by 
 goodwill rather than by enlightened self-interest. The bottom line is 
 that we like Pascal-style languages, we value the integrated design and 
 debugging that Delphi championed in its days of glory, and for a whole 
 lot of reasons we want those facilities on platforms that Borland never 
 took seriously.
 

I never ment to say it's good-will based. The itch part means it's based on 
personal needs as well of course. The point was it's not based on 3rd party 
needs or requests (at least not enough).

 Now I'm trying to do my bit keeping things going on SPARC, in part 
 because it's a representative non-x86 architecture so is worth attention 
 but also because- at present- it's comparatively easy to get SPARC-based 
 systems which go rather larger than x86-based.
 
 Finally, I would thank you not to mis-quote me. You claim that I wrote 
 we'll be forced to go elsewhere. I did not write that, what I put was 
 I'm in a position where I find myself wondering whether I should start
 looking at C# or possibly Embarcadero's current offering which I think 
 is fair comment. We should all be doing that now and again, not so much 
 to try to woo new customers but simply to ensure that there was not 
 some much-appreciated and easy-to-implement facility which was being 
 overlooked.
 

Fair enough about the quote, but the wording you used originally made the 
impression of blackmailing on me, that's where the original tension is from.

I understand your position and the original message now, and to explain my 
reaction, we get some people here which when their personal needs are not met 
(usually bussiness driven people), end up being all negativist about the 
project and start a sort of mini-war about how they'll go to insert other 
project here and how ours sucks etc. usually very immature reactions.

The original misconception was on my side though, I misinterpreted your message 
as being somewhat blackmail-ish while you were simply stating a decision (the 
main reason I think was that you mentioned concrete alternatives which led me 
to believe you ment to do some sort of they're better statement).

As to the problem of Gtk2/LCL speed, it's still quite possible there's a bug in 
LCL which does some unnecessary drawing/signals in gtk2 (this was so in the 
past, but on my end/setup was fixed). Many people get problems with remote 
lazarus tho, but I'm not sure if it's only Lazarus/LCL or also other gtk2 
programs. Also as I said before, gtk2 performance in general depends heavily on 
many aspects including the drivers, theme, it's version and settings in X.org 
(for examply my miraculous speed is actually result of using the EXA 
accelmethod).

I have no idea about CE, the only time I used lazarus CE apps was to test my 
lib in an emulator (so it was slow enough by itself).

 -- 
 Mark Morgan Lloyd
 markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk
 
 [Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
 ___
 Lazarus mailing list
 Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
 http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


-- 
Aleš Katona [EMAIL PROTECTED]

___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-13 Thread Graeme Geldenhuys
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 12:36 PM, Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho

 Gmail won't take .exe or .zip with an exe inside, so change the
 extensions to close similars, like winzip and winexe.

Yeah, that is damn irritating!!!  Plus they don't even do a good job
of it. I attached a .tar.gz with only source code in it. The email got
rejected saying it contains and executable!! Dumb idiots!

As an alternative, use the good old method of manually base64 encoding
or uuencode your attachments and paste them into your email as
standard text. How sad that we need to resort to the stone ages
because ISP's and people like GMail can't find better solutions to
virus. Everybody should simply switch to Linux and kiss viruses
goodbye! :-)

PS:
FPC comes with a base64 and I think a uuencode/decode units.


Regards,
  - Graeme -


___
fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit
http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-13 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Aleš Katona wrote:

  Fair enough about the quote, but the wording you used originally made
  the impression of blackmailing on me, that's where the original
  tension is from.

That was certainly not my intention and I apologise without reservation 
to anybody who took it that way.

However if somebody had said C# won't do what you want because it 
doesn't have a decent form designer or integrated debugger it would 
certainly have reinforced my preference to stay with Lazarus.

  I understand your position and the original message now, and to
  explain my reaction, we get some people here which when their personal
  needs are not met (usually bussiness driven people), end up being all
  negativist about the project and start a sort of mini-war about how
  they'll go to insert other project here and how ours sucks etc.
  usually very immature reactions.

My position is that if somebody wants a feature in a piece of 
open-source software and has commercial resources they should sponsor 
its development with a bounty. I've never said I want this feature, I 
admit that I have rather thrown my hands up in horror when something 
doesn't work (e.g. hiding the menu bar in gtk1), stops working (SPARC in 
0.9.26) or is implausibly slow (e.g. gtk2 to a remote X screen). If 
somebody doesn't have commercial resources they should use their free 
time to learn how to add the facilities they want. If somebody has 
neither commercial resources nor free time I guess a bit of charity is 
in order, but they certainly shouldn't /demand/ anything :-)

  As to the problem of Gtk2/LCL speed, it's still quite possible there's
  a bug in LCL which does some unnecessary drawing/signals in gtk2 (this
  was so in the past, but on my end/setup was fixed).

I don't think that speed is really the issue. The Big Freeze after 
mouse movement is far more serious, and using Wireshark I've not seen 
LAN traffic during this- I might be wrong and will revisit if I've got time.

  Many people get problems with remote lazarus tho, but I'm not sure if
  it's only Lazarus/LCL or also other gtk2 programs.

I think it's specific to Lazarus in this case since I've not seen other 
problems with Debian Lenny which defaults to gtk2, and I almost 
invariably run this to a remote screen. It could be some rarely-used 
facility in the gtk2 libraries that is only being used by the LCL, but 
that is tantamount to saying it's a Lazarus problem.

  Also as I said before, gtk2 performance in general depends heavily on
  many aspects including the drivers, theme, it's version and settings
  in X.org (for examply my miraculous speed is actually result of
  using the EXA accelmethod).

Understood, and I think that the significant difference in gtk2 
performance between the two machines I was using as X terminals (I 
prefer that term because so many people get confused by discussion of 
what a server is in this context) suggests that at least part of the 
speed issue is dependent upon properties or facilities negotiated 
between gtk and X. However as I've said I don't think reduced 
performance is the significant issue here.

Going back to your earlier question about display types, both systems 
that I was using as X terminals for test purposes are probably far too 
old to have significant hardware acceleration- certainly as is 
understood today. The IBM PC-310 is reported by lspci to have an S3 
86C864, the Sony Maiow is reported by NT to be a NeoMagic MagicGraph 
128XV; in both cases they are operating at 1024x768x16 (I think) and 
have about 2Mb RAM. Obviously the video in Sun systems is custom, there 
are issues on that platform about what kernel versions support 
acceleration for GLX that I think aren't relevant to the current 
discussion; the IBM has a Savage which again has acceleration issues 
which I don't think are relevant since in general I'm not using it as a 
display device. The remaining Compaqs have onboard video, I might be 
able to replace the 3000 with something marginally newer from our 
hardware store but I don't think the details are relevant.

I need to press on with a bit of USB hacking to keep people happy at 
this end, I'm also trying to revisit 0.9.27+gtk2 on SPARC. If I can I'll 
try to look at the menu bar issue with gtk1, but the Big Freeze almost 
certainly needs more familiarity with the LCL's innards than I will be 
able to build up in finite time.

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-13 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Luiz Americo Pereira Camara wrote:
 Mark Morgan Lloyd escreveu:
 Having said that I want to try to get 0.9.27 onto my remaining available 
 SPARC system, I'm very worried at the prospect of being marooned with 
 gtk1 on 0.9.24 while the rest of the World moves on
 
 
 Did you tried to compile/use 0.9.27 with gtk1? It still possible to do 
 that. No need to switch to older versions of Lazarus/fpc.

The current situation with 0.9.27+2.2.3 on SPARC appears to be as below.

gtk1: Bus error in object inspector attempting to create an event handler.

gtk2: IDE operation appears OK but bus error during compilation.

Both raise an exception and fail to exit (I also see this on ARM).

I'm afraid I don't have backtraces for these, I need to get a copy of 
0.9.27 onto a more accessible development machine- something I'm happier 
doing now that my desk system is back on a usable 0.9.24.

Unfortunately my fastest SPARC only has gtk1 on it- I could probably fix 
that by changing distro but there's only so many problems I can cope 
with at one time.

I'll try to get onto this in a few days but I'm likely to need some 
help. Please don't kick me too hard :-)

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-13 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:

 The fpGUI UI Designer project file is located in
 fpgui/uidesigner/uidesigner.lpi
 Alteratively you can compile from the command line as follows:
   cd fpgui/uidesigner
   fpc @extrafpc.cfg uidesigner.lpr

Runs both locally and remotely. I had to tinker with the -Fu in 
extrafpc.cfg to compile, so far I've only used 0.9.24 and haven't tried x86.

I'll put more time into this presently, but after what I've seen over 
the last few days I think getting LCL+fpgui complete would be an 
admirable endeavour since it looks as though otherwise we will be at the 
mercy of gtk1 being discontinued and gtk2 being hobbled by excessive 
overhead. It might even be a good default widget set, with 
gtk2/Qt/Carbon etc. being selected where the target distro and window 
manager are known.

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-13 Thread Graeme Geldenhuys
On Thu, Nov 13, 2008 at 10:36 PM, Mark Morgan Lloyd
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Runs both locally and remotely. I had to tinker with the -Fu in
 extrafpc.cfg to compile, so far I've only used 0.9.24 and haven't tried x86.

Excellent. :-)  Could you pass on those changes to extrafpc.cfg, so I
can add it in.

 overhead. It might even be a good default widget set, with
 gtk2/Qt/Carbon etc. being selected where the target distro and window
 manager are known.

A few others have suggested this to me as well, but that's up to the
Lazarus developers and how quickly we can get LCL-fpGUI implemented
and stable.  The huge benefit of LCL-fpGUI will be bug fixing and
feature support. No need to limit the widget set to a specific version
of the GUI toolkit. Plus if there is a bug or some implementation
difference in fpGUI it could easily be tweaked, whereas with GTK2, Qt
etc you are out of luck.


Regards,
  - Graeme -


___
fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit
http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-12 Thread Henry Vermaak
2008/11/11 Aleš Katona [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 Now don't get me wrong.. there's nothing wrong on going to other solutions 
 (even ones which have cost as products) if your situation warrants it. I have 
 also sometimes used different solutions where time didn't permit to fix the 
 various FPC/Lazarus problems (for commercial projects).

 What I don't like is when people try to sort of blackmail their problems 
 into attention by statements like you did before regarding we'll be forced 
 to go elsewhere. This isn't a demand driven development model, bugs are 
 fixed on personal mood/itch basis, not on someone customer needs (although 
 majority and critical bugs obviously get more attention).

 So if you think your money/time is best spent elsewhere, fine, but don't make 
 a crybaby out of the decision. If you decide to stay and help with the 
 problem then even better of course :)

i think you are misunderstanding mark, here.  the fact that he is
taking the time to test and write detailed emails _is_ his
contribution.  the hardest part of solving the problem is pinpointing
it, in many cases.  this problem might not even be related to lazarus,
i guess.

henry

___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-12 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Aleš Katona wrote:
  Now don't get me wrong.. there's nothing wrong on going to
  other solutions (even ones which have cost as products) if
  your situation warrants it. I have also sometimes used
  different solutions where time didn't permit to fix the
  various FPC/Lazarus problems (for commercial projects).
 
  What I don't like is when people try to sort of blackmail
  their problems into attention by statements like you did before
  regarding we'll be forced to go elsewhere. This isn't a
  demand driven development model, bugs are fixed on personal
  mood/itch basis, not on someone customer needs (although
  majority and critical bugs obviously get more attention).
 
  So if you think your money/time is best spent elsewhere, fine,
  but don't make a crybaby out of the decision. If you decide to
  stay and help with the problem then even better of course :)
 
  NOTE: opinions here are my own

Fair enough, but I think that puts me in a position that I need to state 
my policy and that of the people I work for and with.

My policy is that I would prefer to build up enough competence in 
Lazarus and FPC to be able to make a worthwhile contribution to them.

Our policy is that we don't want to be forced into supplying equipment 
and services to our customers which carry unfavourable technical and 
contractual baggage. Roughly translated, we don't want to embed MS OSes 
in x86 kit unless it really is inevitable :-)

We need to eat, and if it gets to the point where the time I'm putting 
into dragging myself painfully up the learning curve prevents me from 
doing concrete development and system management that is going to be a 
problem. Fortunately I don't think we're particularly near that, but I 
regularly find that real work intervenes in things that are far more 
interesting and knocks me offline for days or weeks.

I think you are being slightly unfair characterising Lazarus, and by 
extension other open-source projects, as being driven entirely by 
goodwill rather than by enlightened self-interest. The bottom line is 
that we like Pascal-style languages, we value the integrated design and 
debugging that Delphi championed in its days of glory, and for a whole 
lot of reasons we want those facilities on platforms that Borland never 
took seriously.

Now I'm trying to do my bit keeping things going on SPARC, in part 
because it's a representative non-x86 architecture so is worth attention 
but also because- at present- it's comparatively easy to get SPARC-based 
systems which go rather larger than x86-based.

Finally, I would thank you not to mis-quote me. You claim that I wrote 
we'll be forced to go elsewhere. I did not write that, what I put was 
I'm in a position where I find myself wondering whether I should start
looking at C# or possibly Embarcadero's current offering which I think 
is fair comment. We should all be doing that now and again, not so much 
to try to woo new customers but simply to ensure that there was not 
some much-appreciated and easy-to-implement facility which was being 
overlooked.

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-12 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Henry Vermaak wrote:

 you can send it my way.  i've got an acer n30 that i've used with
 lazarus before, so it wouldn't hurt testing on that.

Thanks, I'll drop him a note to make sure he sees this.

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-12 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Henry Vermaak wrote:

 i think you are misunderstanding mark, here.  the fact that he is
 taking the time to test and write detailed emails _is_ his
 contribution.  the hardest part of solving the problem is pinpointing
 it, in many cases.  this problem might not even be related to lazarus,
 i guess.

I just wish I could do more. But I'm working on it :-)

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-12 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Héctor Fiandor Rosario wrote:
 Dear Mark, my congratulations for yor work in LFP.
 
 I am very happy with this compiler and really, it was very easy to 
 migrate from Delphi5 to LFP

I don't know why you're thanking me- I certainly don't deserve any of 
it. :-)

There's a long list of the people that matter in the IDE's About 
Lazarus box, and I can assure you that I am as indebted to them as you are.

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-12 Thread Henry Vermaak
2008/11/12 Mark Morgan Lloyd [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:

 I then copied the application over to the PDA again. The program load
 time (i.e. from tapping the icon to the start of drawing the window) was
 much better, but disappointingly the execution speed was not observably
 different, i.e. it still took a second to draw the window.

 I've sent Andy over the same test program that I've been running under
 Linux. Apart from (possibly) the high-precision timer there's nothing
 special in there so he should be able to compile and run it.

 If he sees performance problems with my code, i.e. it's a basic
 drawing-speed issue rather than something application-specific, is there
 any other WinCE/PocketPC user who could take both the source and binary
 by direct email in an attempt to see what's going wrong?

you can send it my way.  i've got an acer n30 that i've used with
lazarus before, so it wouldn't hurt testing on that.

henry
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-12 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:

 I then copied the application over to the PDA again. The program load 
 time (i.e. from tapping the icon to the start of drawing the window) was 
 much better, but disappointingly the execution speed was not observably 
 different, i.e. it still took a second to draw the window.

I've sent Andy over the same test program that I've been running under 
Linux. Apart from (possibly) the high-precision timer there's nothing 
special in there so he should be able to compile and run it.

If he sees performance problems with my code, i.e. it's a basic 
drawing-speed issue rather than something application-specific, is there 
any other WinCE/PocketPC user who could take both the source and binary 
by direct email in an attempt to see what's going wrong?

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-11 Thread Luca Olivetti
En/na Mark Morgan Lloyd ha escrit:
 Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
 
 I need to try some methodical tests in case I'm overlooking something.
 
 I've now got a minimal test project for this which does appear to show 
 that the major problem is when gtk2 is run to a remote screen. Any 
 difference between 0.9.24, 0.9.26 and 0.9.27 (as of a couple of weeks 
 ago) is insignificant.

I have an application made with 0.9.26/gtk2 that is routinely[*] run in 
remote through an ssh tunnel (the X server is either linux or windows 
xming).
While it's somewhat slower that running it locally (and by locally I 
mean through vnc, since the machine is headless, so that may mask some 
of the slowness), the difference doesn't seem as dramatic and the app is 
perfectly useable.
The machine where the application is running is a celeron M1.3GHz with 
256M of ram, the os is mandriva 2007.1, kde desktop.
I didn't try to run lazarus itself in remote though, but the performance 
of lazarus/gtk2 on my ageing laptop is very good. In fact, even when I 
was targeting gtk1 due to a memory leak in gtk2 (now solved), I've been 
using the ide compiled with gtk2 long before 0.9.26.

[*]actually the app is just to configure the machine, so it's not run 
everyday, but when it is used it works fine.

Bye
-- 
Luca Olivetti
Wetron Automatización S.A. http://www.wetron.es/
Tel. +34 93 5883004  Fax +34 93 5883007
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-11 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Luca Olivetti wrote:

 No such freeze here (wait, I saw something similar once on the 
 production machine in another project, but it was gtk1 that was busy 
 substituting fonts or something, fixed with a .gtkrc, never saw it with 
 gtk2)

I'll try to add a test for this to my program, but I've seen it repeatedly.

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-11 Thread Martin Schreiber
On Tuesday 11 November 2008 14.09:08 Martin Schreiber wrote:

 Some more competition:   ;-)

 Suse 11 32bit, AMD Athlon XP3000+ 2.15GHz, ATI Radeon 9200SE

fpGUI, current trunk, button with caption, compiled with -B -O3
Duration: 00:00.305
Duration: 00:00.302
Duration: 00:00.303
Duration: 00:00.305
Duration: 00:00.301
Duration: 00:00.301

fpGUI code:
var
  i: integer;
  s: TDateTime;
  e: TDateTime;
begin
  s := Now;
  for i := 1 to 1000 do
  begin
if (i mod 2) = 0 then
  button2.backgroundColor := clRed
else
  button2.backgroundColor := clBlue;
fpgApplication.ProcessMessages;
  end;
  e := Now - s;
  writeln('Duration: ' + FormatDateTime('nn:ss.zz', e));
end;

Martin
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-11 Thread zeljko
On Tuesday 11 November 2008 17:55, Martin Schreiber wrote:
 On Tuesday 11 November 2008 14.09:08 Martin Schreiber wrote:
  Some more competition:   ;-)
 
  Suse 11 32bit, AMD Athlon XP3000+ 2.15GHz, ATI Radeon 9200SE

Fedora 3 (hardly updated) 32 bit, kernel 2.6.20, Intel CoreDuo 2.4 

ok here is qt/gtk2 comparision, current trunk, don't know what are you talking 
about but here are results ;)  

QT:
Duration: 00:00.333
Duration: 00:00.332
Duration: 00:00.330
Duration: 00:00.326
Duration: 00:00.326
Duration: 00:00.327
Duration: 00:00.326
Duration: 00:00.326

GTK2:
Duration: 00:00.735
Duration: 00:00.736
Duration: 00:00.738
Duration: 00:00.736
Duration: 00:00.736
Duration: 00:00.735
Duration: 00:00.734
Duration: 00:00.735

qt/gtk2 code:
var
   i: integer;
  s: TDateTime;
  e: TDateTime;
begin
   s := Now;
   for i := 1 to 1000 do
   begin
 if (i mod 2) = 0 then
   button2.Color := clRed
else
   button2.Color := clBlue;
  Application.ProcessMessages;
   end;
   e := Now - s;
   writeln('Duration: ' + FormatDateTime('nn:ss.zz', e));
end;


zeljko
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-11 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Luca Olivetti wrote:
 En/na Luca Olivetti ha escrit:
 
 I'm surprised with your results, I didn't tune anything, everything was 
 configured automatically by mandriva. I'll see if I can try to run 
 lazarus itself remotely, just to check if my experience matches yours.
 
 I just tried and lazarus itself is unusable this way.
 The display of things is quite speedy, but reaction to mouse clicks lags 
 3 or more seconds.

Yes, I was just starting to look at some more timing and hit on that one 
myself- I hesitate to call it luck. Any mouse activity (not just clicks) 
over the test form (but not over the title bar) freezes the program for 
several seconds.

As a working hypothesis, the Big Freeze I've seen at the start of 
execution isn't anything to do with form initialisation, the program 
runs fine until the pointer is moved onto the form to press the x1,000 
button.

I wasn't entirely joking in my earlier rant: some loss of performance 
over a remote connection is tolerable. Lockups aren't.

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-11 Thread Graeme Geldenhuys
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 7:27 PM, zeljko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Same code without ProcessMessages (qt/gtk2)

 QT (can you imagine this ;) )
 Duration: 00:00.025
 Duration: 00:00.025

Yes I get the same under GTK1, but it doesn't actually redraw (update
the screen) on every iteration, so that doesn't count. :)


Regards,
  - Graeme -


___
fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit
http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-11 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:

 I don't fiddle with graphics much. As long as I get the correct
 resolution for my LCD or Laptop screen and my flurry screensaver
 runs smoothly, I'm a happy man. :-)  My OS is a stock standard Ubuntu
 7.10 (32 bit) and the occasional apt security updates.

In the specific case of the laptop that I was able to use for the most 
complete set of tests that is a very clean system- it's had repeated 
ab-initio Debian Lennys installed onto it and it's not even got 
significant development files- the test programs were moved over as 
binaries.

 Just curious... Could you compile the fpGUI UI Designer and run that
 remotely? Alternatively, I can email you a binary if you don't want to
 go through the compile process.  If I run any fpGUI based apps
 remotely, I have no speed issues.

I'm fairly happy compiling from scratch- what sources do I need, what 
(Debian) development packages am I likely to require, is this from GUI 
or from command line and in either case what special instructions?

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-11 Thread Graeme Geldenhuys
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 6:55 PM, Martin Schreiber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 fpGUI, current trunk, button with caption, compiled with -B -O3
 Duration: 00:00.305
 Duration: 00:00.302

Umm, so there is some space for improvement in fpGUI. I'll try and
find that stray 100ms. :)

  button2.backgroundColor := clBlue;
fpgApplication.ProcessMessages;

I wonder if the call to ProcessMessages in the cause of the 100ms
stray... I don't require that line in fpGUI.  Just added it in, and it
added +-40ms to my timing results.


Regards,
  - Graeme -


___
fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit
http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-11 Thread Aleš Katona
So nvidia (nv) or ati (radeon I guess) or intel? I'd like to know the exact 
setup. Thanks...

-- 
Aleš Katona [EMAIL PROTECTED]

___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-11 Thread zeljko
On Tuesday 11 November 2008 18:17, Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
 On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 6:55 PM, Martin Schreiber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  fpGUI, current trunk, button with caption, compiled with -B -O3
  Duration: 00:00.305
  Duration: 00:00.302

 Umm, so there is some space for improvement in fpGUI. I'll try and
 find that stray 100ms. :)

   button2.backgroundColor := clBlue;
 fpgApplication.ProcessMessages;

 I wonder if the call to ProcessMessages in the cause of the 100ms
 stray... I don't require that line in fpGUI.  Just added it in, and it
 added +-40ms to my timing results.

Same code without ProcessMessages (qt/gtk2)

QT (can you imagine this ;) )
Duration: 00:00.025
Duration: 00:00.025
Duration: 00:00.026
Duration: 00:00.025
Duration: 00:00.025
Duration: 00:00.025
Duration: 00:00.025


GTK2

Duration: 00:00.394
Duration: 00:00.397
Duration: 00:00.390
Duration: 00:00.390
Duration: 00:00.394
Duration: 00:00.393
Duration: 00:00.396

zeljko
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-11 Thread Aleš Katona
Now don't get me wrong.. there's nothing wrong on going to other solutions 
(even ones which have cost as products) if your situation warrants it. I have 
also sometimes used different solutions where time didn't permit to fix the 
various FPC/Lazarus problems (for commercial projects).

What I don't like is when people try to sort of blackmail their problems into 
attention by statements like you did before regarding we'll be forced to go 
elsewhere. This isn't a demand driven development model, bugs are fixed on 
personal mood/itch basis, not on someone customer needs (although majority 
and critical bugs obviously get more attention).

So if you think your money/time is best spent elsewhere, fine, but don't make a 
crybaby out of the decision. If you decide to stay and help with the problem 
then even better of course :)

NOTE: opinions here are my own

-- 
Aleš Katona [EMAIL PROTECTED]

___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-11 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
I'm glad there was a smiley in that message :-)

Aleš Katona wrote:
 If you don't like it there are basically 2 ways to go: go
  elsewhere, or help make it better. Your choice.

This largely started because something wasn't working in gtk1, and I was 
told to use gtk2. Then I found out that gtk2 was only marginally usable.

Take the fact that I'm prepared to put in time trying to quantify the 
problem, and take the fact that the people I work for and with are 
prepared to tolerate that expenditure of time, as a commitment.

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-11 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:
 On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 6:44 PM, Graeme Geldenhuys
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Wow, even local GTK2 is *way* slower than GTK1.  So I really wasn't
 imagining it when I switch Lazarus IDE to GTK2.
 
 We are aware of that. But gtk1 has a lot of other problems too, so it
 isn't exactly a good choice. Just comparing speed may give a false
 impression that gtk1 is a good choice.

I'm not saying that gtk1 is a good choice, but with the performance of 
the gtk2 IDE to a remote screen it is, regrettably, an inevitable choice.

If a gtk2 program takes 13 seconds to run on a local screen against 3 
for gtk1, well basically who cares? CPU power is cheap and users have to 
go with the flow- in just the same way that sooner or later they will 
have to abandon KDE3 in favour of KDE4 even if the user interface is 
unfamiliar and some facilities have been dropped. If a program is slow 
on a remote screen then users will just have to abandon that way of 
working- and while we're at it shouldn't we just recognise that X is 
obsolete and go straight to the hardware?

Look, I'm sorry but as long as both gtk1 and gtk2 are supported as 
standard- and particularly while gtk2 is marked Beta in 0.9.26 which I 
believe is the promoted stable release- it's just not feasible to brush 
UI and performance issues under the carpet. The fact is that users and 
developers won't change their hardware and way of working on a whim, 
they don't even do that without a lot of kicking and screaming when the 
whim comes from Microsoft.

I'd also suggest that saying that the machines Graeme or myself are 
running must be badly set up is not a valid defence. I can't speak for 
Graeme but in my case they're pretty much off-the-shelf Debian or 
Slackware systems, I don't fiddle with graphics setup lightly since I 
had to do far too much of that sort of thing 15 years ago when Linux was 
rather less mature than it is these days.

We've already probably lost Andy who found that CE performance was 
unacceptable, and I don't think he was particularly impressed by his 
initial problems with the documentation. What's more I'm in a position 
where I find myself wondering whether I should start looking at C# or 
possibly Embarcadero's current offering and quite simply tell our 
customers that there's no viable alternative to MS products.

If we can't find a way to sort out these two issues- documentation and 
performance/compatibility- we won't make any friends, no matter how good 
the IDE and language.

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-11 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Luca Olivetti wrote:

 I have an application made with 0.9.26/gtk2 that is routinely[*] run in 
 remote through an ssh tunnel (the X server is either linux or windows 
 xming).

That does of course raise the interesting point that part of the remote 
performance issue could be an X server issue. Fortunately I've got XMing 
on another laptop, so selecting one of the more complete sets of tests:

  x86 800MHz laptop Debian Lenny 0.9.24/2.2.0
   local
   gtk   3.5
   gtk2 12.4
   remote
   gtk   9.5
   gtk2 60.3

remote (XMing)
gtk   5.1
gtk2199.9

  x86 800MHz laptop Debian Lenny 0.9.26/2.2.2
   local
   gtk   3.7
   gtk2 13.7
   remote
   gtk  10.0
   gtk2 60.4

remote (XMing)
gtk   5.0
gtk2199.9

In the case of the gtk2 test I also time a 6 second Big Freeze between 
the form appearing and being usable.

I admit to being very surprised here by gtk1 being faster but gtk2 being 
so much slower. However this isn't a particularly recent copy of XMing- 
the machine is used for mundane but important jobs like setting up the 
PABX and it doesn't get fiddled with.

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-11 Thread Graeme Geldenhuys
On 11/11/08, Mark Morgan Lloyd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  I'd also suggest that saying that the machines Graeme or myself are
  running must be badly set up is not a valid defence. I can't speak for
  Graeme but in my case they're pretty much off-the-shelf Debian or

I don't fiddle with graphics much. As long as I get the correct
resolution for my LCD or Laptop screen and my flurry screensaver
runs smoothly, I'm a happy man. :-)  My OS is a stock standard Ubuntu
7.10 (32 bit) and the occasional apt security updates.


  If we can't find a way to sort out these two issues- documentation and
  performance/compatibility- we won't make any friends, no matter how good
  the IDE and language.

Just curious... Could you compile the fpGUI UI Designer and run that
remotely? Alternatively, I can email you a binary if you don't want to
go through the compile process.  If I run any fpGUI based apps
remotely, I have no speed issues.

Also, I'm trying to complete the last few components for fpGUI so next
year I can actively start the LCL-fpGUI widgetset integration.


Regards,
  - Graeme -


___
fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit
http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-11 Thread Graeme Geldenhuys
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 2:49 PM, Mark Morgan Lloyd
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:

 I don't fiddle with graphics much. As long as I get the correct
 resolution for my LCD or Laptop screen and my flurry screensaver
 runs smoothly, I'm a happy man. :-)  My OS is a stock standard Ubuntu
 7.10 (32 bit) and the occasional apt security updates.

 In the specific case of the laptop that I was able to use for the most
 complete set of tests that is a very clean system- it's had repeated
 ab-initio Debian Lennys installed onto it and it's not even got
 significant development files- the test programs were moved over as
 binaries.

 Just curious... Could you compile the fpGUI UI Designer and run that
 remotely? Alternatively, I can email you a binary if you don't want to
 go through the compile process.  If I run any fpGUI based apps
 remotely, I have no speed issues.

 I'm fairly happy compiling from scratch- what sources do I need, what
 (Debian) development packages am I likely to require, is this from GUI
 or from command line and in either case what special instructions?

Source is available from SourceForge.net and you can get it as follows:

  svn co https://fpgui.svn.sourceforge.net/svnroot/fpgui/trunk fpgui

You can compile from command line or via Lazarus IDE. More detailed
instructions are in fpgui/src/readme.txt file.

Via Lazarus
  src/corelib/x11/fpgui_toolkit.lpk

Via command line
  src/build.sh

The fpGUI UI Designer project file is located in
fpgui/uidesigner/uidesigner.lpi
Alteratively you can compile from the command line as follows:
  cd fpgui/uidesigner
  fpc @extrafpc.cfg uidesigner.lpr

fpGUI requirements are low:
  X11  Xlib dev packages
  xft dev package  (fpGUI only supports anti-aliased text under X11)


Regards,
  - Graeme -


___
fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit
http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-11 Thread Aleš Katona
You're probably using closed-source nvidia or ati drivers?

The ATI ones suck bigtime when it comes to 2d performance, for me it goes to 
50s on the circles test (others go fine).

Or perhaps, if you're using intel drivers or OSS versions (readon, not sure 
about nvidia ones) try adding Option AccelMethod EXA to your device 
section in xorg.conf (WARNING: requires late X/drm, OR update your libdrm and 
drm kernel module from sources).

Works like a charm and shows pretty much that:
1. The closed source drivers have some bug (the circles speed here isn't normal)
2. There's 2D accel available but mostly unused
3. Gtk2 heavily relies on acceleration and good drivers regardless of LCL

-- 
Aleš Katona [EMAIL PROTECTED]

___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-11 Thread Graeme Geldenhuys
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 3:09 PM, Martin Schreiber [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  tbutton1.Color := cl_Red
else
 tbutton1.Color := cl_Blue;

That's cheating. A button is smaller than a panel (w:200 h:100). ;-)
Just joking.


 MSEgui and fpGUI are double buffered (Graeme, please correct me if I am wrong
 with fpGUI).

Yes, all painting in fpGUI is double buffered.  Just goes to show
Martin - it pays to use custom painted widget sets.  ;-)


Regards,
  - Graeme -


___
fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit
http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-11 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Aleš Katona wrote:
 You're probably using closed-source nvidia or ati drivers?

No, I am using nothing other than what come with the standard Debian or 
Slackware distros with the xorg.conf file as installed.

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-11 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Aleš Katona wrote:
 So nvidia (nv) or ati (radeon I guess) or intel? I'd like to know the exact 
 setup. Thanks...

In that case research it based on the fact that test machines include- 
working from memory- a Compaq ProLiant 3000, Compaq AP550 and IBM 
ThinkPad T22 all with onboard graphics, and a Sun Ultra-60 with 2x 
Creator-3D. The System used as an X terminal yesterday was an IBM PC 310 
running an older version of Slackware, and today was a Sony Miaow 
running NT.

Sorry, but right now I'm working on other things and am also hoping to 
find time to eat.

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-11 Thread Aleš Katona
By all means whatever works for you best. We're not offering solutions to keep 
customers here :)

If you don't like it there are basically 2 ways to go: go elsewhere, or help 
make it better. Your choice.

-- 
Aleš Katona [EMAIL PROTECTED]

___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-11 Thread Luca Olivetti
En/na Mark Morgan Lloyd ha escrit:
 Luca Olivetti wrote:
 
 I have an application made with 0.9.26/gtk2 that is routinely[*] run in 
 remote through an ssh tunnel (the X server is either linux or windows 
 xming).
 
 That does of course raise the interesting point that part of the remote 
 performance issue could be an X server issue. Fortunately I've got XMing 
 on another laptop, so selecting one of the more complete sets of tests:

I didn't do any measurement, simply because I didn't notice any big 
problem with performance, and I saw no noticeable difference between the 
linux x server and xming.
In both cases the connection is tunneled through ssh without 
compression, which, if anything, should make things even worse.

 In the case of the gtk2 test I also time a 6 second Big Freeze between 
 the form appearing and being usable.

No such freeze here (wait, I saw something similar once on the 
production machine in another project, but it was gtk1 that was busy 
substituting fonts or something, fixed with a .gtkrc, never saw it with 
gtk2)


 I admit to being very surprised here by gtk1 being faster but gtk2 being 
 so much slower. However this isn't a particularly recent copy of XMing- 
 the machine is used for mundane but important jobs like setting up the 
 PABX and it doesn't get fiddled with.

The version of xming I used is 6.9.0.23 but I doubt it makes a difference.
I'm surprised with your results, I didn't tune anything, everything was 
configured automatically by mandriva. I'll see if I can try to run 
lazarus itself remotely, just to check if my experience matches yours.

Bye
-- 
Luca Olivetti
Wetron Automatización S.A. http://www.wetron.es/
Tel. +34 93 5883004  Fax +34 93 5883007
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-10 Thread Graeme Geldenhuys
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 7:39 PM, Mark Morgan Lloyd
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 x86 800MHz laptop Debian Lenny 0.9.26/2.2.2
local
gtk   3.7
gtk2 13.7
remote
gtk  10.0
gtk2 60.4


Wow, even local GTK2 is *way* slower than GTK1.  So I really wasn't
imagining it when I switch Lazarus IDE to GTK2.

I was curious to see what it does on my system. So I created a test
based on what you said. I used GTK1, GTK2 and fpGUI toolkit. In all
three tests all component where the exact same size and contained the
exact same text.  Here are my results from the following code:

---
procedure TForm1.Button1Click(Sender: TObject);
var
  i: integer;
  s: TDateTime;
  e: TDateTime;
begin
  s := Now;
  for i := 1 to 1000 do
  begin
if (i mod 2) = 0 then
  Panel1.Color := clRed
else
  Panel1.Color := clBlue;
Application.ProcessMessages;
  end;
  e := Now - s;
  writeln('Duration: ' + FormatDateTime('nn:ss.zz', e));
end;
---

Clearly GTK2 is as speedy as a snail !!! :-(


[EMAIL PROTECTED]:speed$ ./project1_gtk1
Duration: 00:00.229
Duration: 00:00.219
Duration: 00:00.231
Duration: 00:00.238
Duration: 00:00.306
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:speed$ ./project1_gtk2
Duration: 00:01.127
Duration: 00:01.065
Duration: 00:01.158
Duration: 00:01.055
Duration: 00:01.119
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:speed$ ./project1_fpgui
Duration: 00:00.275
Duration: 00:00.275
Duration: 00:00.274
Duration: 00:00.276
Duration: 00:00.276



Regards,
  - Graeme -


___
fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit
http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-10 Thread Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho
On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 6:44 PM, Graeme Geldenhuys
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Wow, even local GTK2 is *way* slower than GTK1.  So I really wasn't
 imagining it when I switch Lazarus IDE to GTK2.

We are aware of that. But gtk1 has a lot of other problems too, so it
isn't exactly a good choice. Just comparing speed may give a false
impression that gtk1 is a good choice.

-- 
Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-10 Thread Lord Satan
On Mon, 10 Nov 2008 22:44:12 +0200
Graeme Geldenhuys [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Clearly GTK2 is as speedy as a snail !!! :-(
On your system this may be true. I must admit that it was a while ago when I 
compared gtk and gtk2 performance, but on my system gtk2 was actually faster 
than gtk.
Is my assumption correct, that you are running a 32bit system?

-- 
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-10 Thread Ales Katona
Please run gtkperf program on your end and give results (run it locally).

If you don't have it in packages, just get libgtk2-dev and compile from
sources (./configure  make  make install [as root]).

If you get more than ~10 seconds, something is wrong with your setup
(driver/X/theme). I get ~5s here with the OSS driver and EXA. Gtk2 flies
quite fast.

2008/11/10 Graeme Geldenhuys [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 7:39 PM, Mark Morgan Lloyd
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  x86 800MHz laptop Debian Lenny 0.9.26/2.2.2
 local
 gtk   3.7
 gtk2 13.7
 remote
 gtk  10.0
 gtk2 60.4


 Wow, even local GTK2 is *way* slower than GTK1.  So I really wasn't
 imagining it when I switch Lazarus IDE to GTK2.

 I was curious to see what it does on my system. So I created a test
 based on what you said. I used GTK1, GTK2 and fpGUI toolkit. In all
 three tests all component where the exact same size and contained the
 exact same text.  Here are my results from the following code:

 ---
 procedure TForm1.Button1Click(Sender: TObject);
 var
  i: integer;
  s: TDateTime;
  e: TDateTime;
 begin
  s := Now;
  for i := 1 to 1000 do
  begin
if (i mod 2) = 0 then
  Panel1.Color := clRed
else
  Panel1.Color := clBlue;
Application.ProcessMessages;
  end;
  e := Now - s;
  writeln('Duration: ' + FormatDateTime('nn:ss.zz', e));
 end;
 ---

 Clearly GTK2 is as speedy as a snail !!! :-(


 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:speed$ ./project1_gtk1
 Duration: 00:00.229
 Duration: 00:00.219
 Duration: 00:00.231
 Duration: 00:00.238
 Duration: 00:00.306
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:speed$ ./project1_gtk2
 Duration: 00:01.127
 Duration: 00:01.065
 Duration: 00:01.158
 Duration: 00:01.055
 Duration: 00:01.119
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:speed$ ./project1_fpgui
 Duration: 00:00.275
 Duration: 00:00.275
 Duration: 00:00.274
 Duration: 00:00.276
 Duration: 00:00.276



 Regards,
  - Graeme -


 ___
 fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit
 http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/
 ___
 Lazarus mailing list
 Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
 http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus




-- 
Feel the power of Opensource.
Feel the power of Free Pascal.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-10 Thread Ales Katona
Here's my result, for your comparison (AMD Turion 64bit 1xcore, 2gb RAM, OSS
Ati driver (no 3D) with EXA on ATI Mobility Radeon X1600:

GtkPerf 0.40 - Starting testing: Mon Nov 10 23:23:01 2008

GtkEntry - time:  0,03
GtkComboBox - time:  0,63
GtkComboBoxEntry - time:  0,54
GtkSpinButton - time:  0,07
GtkProgressBar - time:  0,05
GtkToggleButton - time:  0,19
GtkCheckButton - time:  0,23
GtkRadioButton - time:  0,31
GtkTextView - Add text - time:  0,66
GtkTextView - Scroll - time:  0,23
GtkDrawingArea - Lines - time:  0,46
GtkDrawingArea - Circles - time:  0,44
GtkDrawingArea - Text - time:  1,17
GtkDrawingArea - Pixbufs - time:  0,07
 ---
Total time:  5,08


2008/11/10 Ales Katona [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 Please run gtkperf program on your end and give results (run it locally).

 If you don't have it in packages, just get libgtk2-dev and compile from
 sources (./configure  make  make install [as root]).

 If you get more than ~10 seconds, something is wrong with your setup
 (driver/X/theme). I get ~5s here with the OSS driver and EXA. Gtk2 flies
 quite fast.

 2008/11/10 Graeme Geldenhuys [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 On Mon, Nov 10, 2008 at 7:39 PM, Mark Morgan Lloyd
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  x86 800MHz laptop Debian Lenny 0.9.26/2.2.2
 local
 gtk   3.7
 gtk2 13.7
 remote
 gtk  10.0
 gtk2 60.4


 Wow, even local GTK2 is *way* slower than GTK1.  So I really wasn't
 imagining it when I switch Lazarus IDE to GTK2.

 I was curious to see what it does on my system. So I created a test
 based on what you said. I used GTK1, GTK2 and fpGUI toolkit. In all
 three tests all component where the exact same size and contained the
 exact same text.  Here are my results from the following code:

 ---
 procedure TForm1.Button1Click(Sender: TObject);
 var
  i: integer;
  s: TDateTime;
  e: TDateTime;
 begin
  s := Now;
  for i := 1 to 1000 do
  begin
if (i mod 2) = 0 then
  Panel1.Color := clRed
else
  Panel1.Color := clBlue;
Application.ProcessMessages;
  end;
  e := Now - s;
  writeln('Duration: ' + FormatDateTime('nn:ss.zz', e));
 end;
 ---

 Clearly GTK2 is as speedy as a snail !!! :-(


 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:speed$ ./project1_gtk1
 Duration: 00:00.229
 Duration: 00:00.219
 Duration: 00:00.231
 Duration: 00:00.238
 Duration: 00:00.306
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:speed$ ./project1_gtk2
 Duration: 00:01.127
 Duration: 00:01.065
 Duration: 00:01.158
 Duration: 00:01.055
 Duration: 00:01.119
 [EMAIL PROTECTED]:speed$ ./project1_fpgui
 Duration: 00:00.275
 Duration: 00:00.275
 Duration: 00:00.274
 Duration: 00:00.276
 Duration: 00:00.276



 Regards,
  - Graeme -


 ___
 fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit
 http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/
 ___
 Lazarus mailing list
 Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
 http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus




 --
 Feel the power of Opensource.
 Feel the power of Free Pascal.




-- 
Feel the power of Opensource.
Feel the power of Free Pascal.
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-10 Thread Luiz Americo Pereira Camara
Mark Morgan Lloyd escreveu:
 Having said that I want to try to get 0.9.27 onto my remaining available 
 SPARC system, I'm very worried at the prospect of being marooned with 
 gtk1 on 0.9.24 while the rest of the World moves on


Did you tried to compile/use 0.9.27 with gtk1? It still possible to do 
that. No need to switch to older versions of Lazarus/fpc.

Luiz
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-10 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Lord Satan wrote:

 On your system this may be true. I must admit that it was a while
  ago when I compared gtk and gtk2 performance, but on my system gtk2
  was actually faster than gtk.

Do you think your tests predated 0.9.24? I'd rather not go back any 
earlier unless the results were likely to be some use to somebody. As it 
is I'm not trying to criticise, but rather to exercise the code in a way 
that otherwise appears neglected.

 Is my assumption correct, that you are running a 32bit system?

Mine certainly were.

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-10 Thread Graeme Geldenhuys
2008/11/11 Ales Katona [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 Please run gtkperf program on your end and give results (run it locally).

 If you don't have it in packages, just get libgtk2-dev and compile from
 sources (./configure  make  make install [as root]).

 If you get more than ~10 seconds, something is wrong with your setup
 (driver/X/theme). I get ~5s here with the OSS driver and EXA. Gtk2 flies
 quite fast.


Here is the results I got a few days ago on my wok PC.  My laptop is a
bit faster than than - I'll run it shortly and post the results...
I'm running the Clearlooks theme in my laptop.

---[ Work PC ]
I did so now on my PC. P4 2.2GHz with 1GB ram and integrated
ATI video card running Ubuntu 7.10 (32bit).

I couldn't believe the difference it makes when you switch between
themes. The exact same PC, just different themes!!  Here are my
results:

28s - Custom (mixture of what I like)
21s - Bluecurve
26s - ClearLook
24s - Human
17s - Mist
43s - Crux

Wow, not all themes are created equal!  :-)
---[ end ]


Regards,
  - Graeme -


___
fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit
http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-10 Thread Graeme Geldenhuys
On Tue, Nov 11, 2008 at 8:21 AM, Graeme Geldenhuys
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 ---[ Work PC ]
 I did so now on my PC. P4 2.2GHz with 1GB ram and integrated
 ATI video card running Ubuntu 7.10 (32bit).

 I couldn't believe the difference it makes when you switch between
 themes. The exact same PC, just different themes!!  Here are my
 results:

 28s - Custom (mixture of what I like)
 21s - Bluecurve
 26s - ClearLook
 24s - Human
 17s - Mist
 43s - Crux

 Wow, not all themes are created equal!  :-)
 ---[ end ]


And my laptop is a P4 3GHz with 1GB ram and ATI Radeon 9700 video card
running Ubuntu 7.10 (32bit). Clearlooks theme.

---
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ gtkperf
GtkPerf 0.40 - Starting testing: Tue Nov 11 08:51:36 2008

GtkEntry - time:  0.07
GtkComboBox - time:  3.70
GtkComboBoxEntry - time:  2.82
GtkSpinButton - time:  0.49
GtkProgressBar - time:  0.55
GtkToggleButton - time:  0.92
GtkCheckButton - time:  1.38
GtkRadioButton - time:  1.60
GtkTextView - Add text - time:  1.32
GtkTextView - Scroll - time:  0.61
GtkDrawingArea - Lines - time:  0.27
GtkDrawingArea - Circles - time:  0.54
GtkDrawingArea - Text - time:  5.29
GtkDrawingArea - Pixbufs - time:  0.42
 ---
Total time: 19.98
---


Things like GLGears and the Flurry screensaver is silky smooth on my
laptop. It's much better than my work PC, but it's not near your 5
seconds!


Regards,
  - Graeme -


___
fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit
http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-08 Thread Henrique Faria

You should disable the (-gl) in debugging to have symbols stripped from exe.

Henrique.

 From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Date: Sat, 8 Nov 2008 09:31:14 +
 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Subject: Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE
 
 Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
  Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:
  On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 12:33 PM, Henry Vermaak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  compile with -Xs or manually run arm-wince-strip --strip-unneeded on the 
  exe.
  I don't know if it's any different, but I usually do: arm-wince-strip
  --strip-all myfile.exe
  
  Thanks both. I've dropped Andy a note reminding him to check the ML.
 
 This from Andy:
 
 The machine isn't short of RAM - it has 128Mb and I've closed down all 
 all other programs.
 
 But the .exe was 9.81Mb, not 1.5Mb!
 
 Stripping, i.e. compiling with -Xs, made no difference. But, now knowing 
 it should be smaller, I then played with all the compiler options and 
 the one that did make a difference in the size was removing the default 
 display line numbers in run time error backtrace. With this unchecked 
 the size came down to 1.615Mb.
 
 Stripping, setting unit style smart linkable and link smart are all 
 now set but made no difference.
 
 I then copied the application over to the PDA again. The program load 
 time (i.e. from tapping the icon to the start of drawing the window) was 
 much better, but disappointingly the execution speed was not observably 
 different, i.e. it still took a second to draw the window.
 ___
 Lazarus mailing list
 Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
 http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

_
Conheça o Windows Live Spaces, a rede de relacionamentos do Messenger!
http://www.amigosdomessenger.com.br/___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-07 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:
 On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 8:04 AM, Mark Morgan Lloyd
 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Somebody I know started experimenting with Lazarus for CE a few days ago
 but finds the performance unacceptable- vastly slower than C#. Is this
 likely to be caused by debugging code, and again can this be disabled-
 preferably without having to recompile the IDE?
 
 With CE I suppose you mean Windows CE?
 
 Performance is a very generic term. Performance of what? Non-visual
 code? Graphics drawing?
 
 I will suppose it is graphics drawing. No, I doubt that the debug
 information causes this. I have noticed the graphics speed do is much
 slower then in a desktop (I don't use .NET, so can't comment there),
 but I never researched to find the reason why.
 
 Also, without a benchmark, your assertion is empty. Which Lazarus code
 is slower then which C# code? Are they really equivalent?

This is on behalf of Andy Lawrie who is having problems connecting to 
the list at present. Apologies if I've done anything that screws the 
formatting.


It was myself who experienced the speed problems. I tried to post them 4 
or 5 times but the mailing list rejects my emails - I will try this once 
more.

As a test project I have been porting a WinCE (ARM) application I first 
wrote using C#. It's for PocketPC.

The C# version was compact but sluggish in operation, so I rewrote it in 
old fashioned vanilla C, directly to the WinCE API. This also produced a 
compact executable, and the execution speed was excellent. The downside 
is that development is painfully longwinded. While the C version of the 
app works just fine, I will at some point want to extend it, and Lazarus 
looks to be a far better development environment. And indeed, it is. 
I've been very impressed with it.

Most development was using the emulator, but when I copied it over to 
the PDA for the first time I was shocked by the performance. It's about 
10 times slower than the C# version, which already was too slow. I knew 
the executables were going to be large, and accept that as a penalty for 
the very much easier development. But I hadn't considered that execution 
speed might be an issue.

All it is doing is drawing some standard edit boxes and buttons on the 
screen. The PDA I tried it on is an XDA Stellar.

Optimisation is on Level 1 and there are no checks enabled.

Is it possible I have just got some settings wrong somewhere, or is this 
speed to be expected?

pp Rgds, Andy
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-07 Thread Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho
On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 7:00 AM, Mark Morgan Lloyd
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Most development was using the emulator, but when I copied it over to
 the PDA for the first time I was shocked by the performance.

So the performance was good using the emulator?

 All it is doing is drawing some standard edit boxes and buttons on the
 screen. The PDA I tried it on is an XDA Stellar.

Well, I can't think of why this kinds of things would be slow. They
shouldn't, just simple as that.

Maybe your device has very little memory, and the executable fills it.
Did you strip before moving the executable to the PDA?

The typical executable size without debug information is 1.5 MB

 Is it possible I have just got some settings wrong somewhere, or is this
 speed to be expected?

No, it's not expected for such simple applications. Also considering
this is the first report of such kind.

-- 
Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-07 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:

 Maybe your device has very little memory, and the executable fills it.
 Did you strip before moving the executable to the PDA?

Just in case Andy isn't familiar with this, how's it done on CE?

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-07 Thread Henry Vermaak
2008/11/7 Henry Vermaak [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 2008/11/7 Mark Morgan Lloyd [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:

 Maybe your device has very little memory, and the executable fills it.
 Did you strip before moving the executable to the PDA?

 Just in case Andy isn't familiar with this, how's it done on CE?

 compile with -Xs or manually run arm-wince-strip --strip-unneeded on the exe.

in lazarus there is Strip Symbols From Executable (-Xs) in the
linker tab under compiler options.

henry
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-07 Thread Osvaldo Filho
Please, sorry.
I omit the fact that i talk about in LTSp Client machine.

2008/11/6 Osvaldo Filho [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 Sorry my english.

 One time a go, i test this, the problem appear with click the mouse but
 when i use space bar to push a button the speed is normal!

 2008/11/6 Mark Morgan Lloyd [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
  On 11/6/08, Aleš Katona [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:  I've recently
 moved to freeBSD 64bit and was forced to use the OSS radeon driver, and my
 gtkperf result went from ~55s to ~5s.  Try gtkperf on your machine and see
 what you get. If any test takes more than few seconds, there's something
 wrong, either your theme, or your driver.
  Holly crap!!! I have heard about 'gtkperf', but have never run itbefore.
 I did so now on my PC. P4 2.2GHz with 1GB ram and integratedATI video card
 running Ubuntu 7.10 (32bit).
  I couldn't believe the difference it makes when you switch
 betweenthemes. The exact same PC, just different themes!!  Here are
 myresults:
  28s - Custom (mixture of what I like)21s - Bluecurve26s - ClearLook24s -
 Human17s - Mist43s - Crux
  Wow, not all themes are created equal!  :-)

 I'll investigate but I'd add that I'm running KDE rather than Gnome. I'd
 not expect theming to get in the way in this case but I suppose that
 there is a possibility that gtk2 is looking for some sort of setup info
 that's missing and failing with no grace whatsoever.

 Thinking about it, I'm pretty sure I see the same problem with Slackware
 12.1 on x86 so it's not Debian-specific.

 --
 Mark Morgan Lloyd
 markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

 [Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or
 colleagues]
 ___
 Lazarus mailing list
 Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
 http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus



___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-07 Thread Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho
On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 12:33 PM, Henry Vermaak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 compile with -Xs or manually run arm-wince-strip --strip-unneeded on the exe.

I don't know if it's any different, but I usually do: arm-wince-strip
--strip-all myfile.exe

-- 
Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-07 Thread Henry Vermaak
2008/11/7 Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
 All it is doing is drawing some standard edit boxes and buttons on the
 screen. The PDA I tried it on is an XDA Stellar.

 Well, I can't think of why this kinds of things would be slow. They
 shouldn't, just simple as that.

i agree.  i have never seen this sluggishness myself, but it might be
related to a certain widget or part of code.  we won't be able to tell
without further information or an isolated testcase.

henry
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-07 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Felipe Monteiro de Carvalho wrote:
 On Fri, Nov 7, 2008 at 12:33 PM, Henry Vermaak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 compile with -Xs or manually run arm-wince-strip --strip-unneeded on the exe.
 
 I don't know if it's any different, but I usually do: arm-wince-strip
 --strip-all myfile.exe

Thanks both. I've dropped Andy a note reminding him to check the ML.

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-07 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:

 There appears to be far less difference in performance between a 
 networked and local X session when 0.9.24/2.2.0 is used.

0.9.27 (snapshot of a couple of weeks ago) compiled natively on an ARM 
(Debian Etch on an NSLU2 slug) with gtk2 runs at full speed. However 
I note in this case that the window manager is FluxBox rather than KDE 
which I was using on other systems.

I need to try some methodical tests in case I'm overlooking something.

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-06 Thread Graeme Geldenhuys
On 11/6/08, Aleš Katona [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
  I've recently moved to freeBSD 64bit and was forced to use the OSS radeon 
 driver, and my gtkperf result went from ~55s to ~5s.

  Try gtkperf on your machine and see what you get. If any test takes more 
 than few seconds, there's something wrong, either your theme, or your driver.


Holly crap!!! I have heard about 'gtkperf', but have never run it
before. I did so now on my PC. P4 2.2GHz with 1GB ram and integrated
ATI video card running Ubuntu 7.10 (32bit).

I couldn't believe the difference it makes when you switch between
themes. The exact same PC, just different themes!!  Here are my
results:

28s - Custom (mixture of what I like)
21s - Bluecurve
26s - ClearLook
24s - Human
17s - Mist
43s - Crux

Wow, not all themes are created equal!  :-)


Regards,
  - Graeme -


___
fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit
http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/

___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-06 Thread Aleš Katona
I can't comment on CE, but gtk2 performance is very display driver related.

I've recently moved to freeBSD 64bit and was forced to use the OSS radeon 
driver, and my gtkperf result went from ~55s to ~5s.

Try gtkperf on your machine and see what you get. If any test takes more than 
few seconds, there's something wrong, either your theme, or your driver.

Gtk2 isn't the fastest kid on the block, but it's not that slow either, if the 
drivers perform. (you need to use 2D accel, like EXA)

-- 
Aleš Katona [EMAIL PROTECTED]

___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-06 Thread Osvaldo Filho
Sorry my english.

One time a go, i test this, the problem appear with click the mouse but
when i use space bar to push a button the speed is normal!

2008/11/6 Mark Morgan Lloyd [EMAIL PROTECTED]

 Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
  On 11/6/08, Aleš Katona [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:  I've recently
 moved to freeBSD 64bit and was forced to use the OSS radeon driver, and my
 gtkperf result went from ~55s to ~5s.  Try gtkperf on your machine and see
 what you get. If any test takes more than few seconds, there's something
 wrong, either your theme, or your driver.
  Holly crap!!! I have heard about 'gtkperf', but have never run itbefore.
 I did so now on my PC. P4 2.2GHz with 1GB ram and integratedATI video card
 running Ubuntu 7.10 (32bit).
  I couldn't believe the difference it makes when you switch betweenthemes.
 The exact same PC, just different themes!!  Here are myresults:
  28s - Custom (mixture of what I like)21s - Bluecurve26s - ClearLook24s -
 Human17s - Mist43s - Crux
  Wow, not all themes are created equal!  :-)

 I'll investigate but I'd add that I'm running KDE rather than Gnome. I'd
 not expect theming to get in the way in this case but I suppose that
 there is a possibility that gtk2 is looking for some sort of setup info
 that's missing and failing with no grace whatsoever.

 Thinking about it, I'm pretty sure I see the same problem with Slackware
 12.1 on x86 so it's not Debian-specific.

 --
 Mark Morgan Lloyd
 markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

 [Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
 ___
 Lazarus mailing list
 Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
 http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus

___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-06 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
 'gtkperf' was also not in Ubuntu 7.10's repositories. I downloaded the
 .deb file from the sourceforge.net website. It installed without
 problems. I don't know if it supports GTK1 though.

It's still not in Debian Lenny. I'll investigate later, but I think 
the problem is much more basic than a theme or similar.

  either from the command line or using its internal rebuild facility,
  performance plummets: I have to wait for about a minute before a
  component dropped onto a form appears.
 
 I have also noticed a drop in speed since I switched from GTK1 to
 GTK2, but mine is definitely not as slow as you describe. Thought I
 run my Lazarus locally, not over a LAN.

My desktop screens are on a SPARC with everything else connected by X on 
VNC and I'm quite simply not changing that.

Here's what I'll do next: remove 2.2.3 and 0.9.26 from my desktop system 
since they're not reliable, reverting to 2.2.0 and 0.9.24 which have 
served me reasonably well. I'll do my best with my limited time and 
understanding to help pin down the 0.9.26+SPARC problems but if I can't 
then I'll quite simply stay on 0.9.24 on all platforms.

I already know that I can duplicate the gtk2 speed problem over X using 
Debian Etch which is what's installed on my desktop system, if I can't 
duplicate it on a local screen I think that helps pin the problem down.

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-06 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Aleš Katona wrote:
 I can't comment on CE, but gtk2 performance is very display driver related.
 
 I've recently moved to freeBSD 64bit and was forced to use the OSS radeon 
 driver, and my gtkperf result went from ~55s to ~5s.
 
 Try gtkperf on your machine and see what you get. If any test takes more than 
 few seconds, there's something wrong, either your theme, or your driver.
 
 Gtk2 isn't the fastest kid on the block, but it's not that slow either, if 
 the drivers perform. (you need to use 2D accel, like EXA)

Thanks, I'll investigate later and report back. gtkperf doesn't appear 
to be packaged for Debian yet, so I'll need to build from source making 
sure I can test both gtk 1 and 2 (does it actually support both)?

I've got the same poor- in fact apallingly unusable- gtk performance in 
the Lazarus IDE on multiple machines with both 0.9.26 and 0.9.24, with 
FPC 2.2.2 and 2.2.0, with Debian Etch and Lenny, and- in cases where 
I've been able to test- both x86 and SPARC.

The common element is that in all cases I'm running X over the LAN, but 
while Lazarus is fairly snappy with gtk 1 if I recompile it for gtk 2, 
either from the command line or using its internal rebuild facility, 
performance plummets: I have to wait for about a minute before a 
component dropped onto a form appears.

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-06 Thread Marc Weustink
Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
 The common element is that in all cases I'm running X over the LAN, but 
 while Lazarus is fairly snappy with gtk 1 if I recompile it for gtk 2, 
 either from the command line or using its internal rebuild facility, 
 performance plummets: I have to wait for about a minute before a 
 component dropped onto a form appears.

and in another mail:

 My desktop screens are on a SPARC with everything else connected by X on 
 VNC and I'm quite simply not changing that.

Are you running remote by using a VNC server on your sparc end that 
using a vncviewer to access it remotely, or are you running X remote 
(sparc connecting to a remote X server)

The latter I can confirm as dog slow. Over a 1 Gb lan it takes minutes 
before the cursor moves one char in the editor. (Responses to 
mouseclicks on dialogs take the same time btw)
This resulted for me to continue laz development using a gtk1 IDE.

When using a VNCserver, it should work more smooth, since all is handled 
locally and only display changes are copied ove the LAN.

Marc



___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-06 Thread Graeme Geldenhuys
On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 4:14 PM, Marc Weustink [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Are you running remote by using a VNC server on your sparc end that
 using a vncviewer to access it remotely, or are you running X remote
 (sparc connecting to a remote X server)

 The latter I can confirm as dog slow. Over a 1 Gb lan it takes minutes
 before the cursor moves one char in the editor. (Responses to
 mouseclicks on dialogs take the same time btw)
 This resulted for me to continue laz development using a gtk1 IDE.

That must or be a GTK2 or Lazarus LCL issue then. I often connect to a
remove server via 'ssh -X ' and run apps remotely to display on my
local screen.  For example the fpGUI UI Designer and the new TextEdit
component (SynEdit like component) doesn't have any issues. All user
interactions (clicking, draging, typing) are instant, as if I were
running them locally.

My plan was to develop remotely on the 64bit system, but display
locally. That machine is very beefy compare to my desktop system. If
Lazarus IDE can't run nicely over a remote connection, that will be a
serious issue. :-(

Umm, I should really start working on LCL-fpGUI then. ;-)  This might
solve some issue for a few people.

Regards,
  - Graeme -


___
fpGUI - a cross-platform Free Pascal GUI toolkit
http://opensoft.homeip.net/fpgui/
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-06 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Marc Weustink wrote:

 Are you running remote by using a VNC server on your sparc end that 
 using a vncviewer to access it remotely, or are you running X remote 
 (sparc connecting to a remote X server)

My comment was largely to illustrate the fact that I'm heavily oriented 
towards using a single keyboard and screen(s) rather than having to move 
between desk and whichever workbench a computer is on- even assuming 
it's got a keyboard etc. attached.

The only instance I'm routinely using VNC is to a Win-32 box I use for 
Delphi and as a client to the CIX conferencing system. I'm obviously 
connected to my Sun desktop system (Debian Etch) directly, apart from 
that almost all other Debian and Slackware systems are accessed over X.

The remaining exception to the above is a SPARC system that Vincent was 
tinkering with- I think he's using X for that rather than VNC, but I'm 
not sure what combination of libraries he's been using.

 The latter I can confirm as dog slow. Over a 1 Gb lan it takes minutes 
 before the cursor moves one char in the editor. (Responses to 
 mouseclicks on dialogs take the same time btw)
 This resulted for me to continue laz development using a gtk1 IDE.

That's much what I'm seeing, I similarly concluded that it would be 
better for the moment to continue with the IDE built for gtk1 but I 
assumed that there was debugging code in the system which at some point 
would be removed. If my assumption was wrong then I am troubled.

One thing does occur to me however. If I fire up a system based on 
Debian Lenny, which I believe (somebody please correct me) is based on 
gtk 2, I observe that Gnome itself runs adequately over a networked X 
connection.

In other words, this problem is specific to Lazarus operating over a 
networked X connection, not to gtk 2 itself.

 When using a VNCserver, it should work more smooth, since all is handled 
 locally and only display changes are copied ove the LAN.

I'll investigate, but the number of systems set up here for VNC is 
limited unless it's needed for something special. In general I simply 
enable gdm with xdmcp and everything works fine.

If I get as far as being able to duplicate this problem in a standalone 
program what function should I use to get a millisecond (or better) time?

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-06 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Graeme Geldenhuys wrote:
 Umm, I should really start working on LCL-fpGUI then. ;-)  This might
 solve some issue for a few people.

I agree. The combination of 0.9.26+gtk1 crashing on SPARC and 
0.9.26+gtk2 not crashing as soon but being unusable is a bit of a 
show-stopper for me.

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-06 Thread Lord Satan
On Thu, 06 Nov 2008 17:03:17 +
Mark Morgan Lloyd [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 If I get as far as being able to duplicate this problem in a standalone 
 program what function should I use to get a millisecond (or better) time?
If I understand you correctly you need a high resolution timer?
I recommend EpikTimer: http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/EpikTimer

hih
-- 
A: Because it messes up the order in which people normally read text.
Q: Why is top-posting such a bad thing?
A: Top-posting.
Q: What is the most annoying thing in e-mail?
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-06 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Lord Satan wrote:

 If I understand you correctly you need a high resolution timer?
 I recommend EpikTimer: http://wiki.lazarus.freepascal.org/EpikTimer

Thanks, noted :-)

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus


Re: [Lazarus] Performance of GTK 2 and CE

2008-11-06 Thread Mark Morgan Lloyd
Marc Weustink wrote:


 If I get as far as being able to duplicate this problem in a standalone 
 program what function should I use to get a millisecond (or better) time?
 
 ???

Well, something rather better than a seconds count, anyway :-)

-- 
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk

[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
___
Lazarus mailing list
Lazarus@lazarus.freepascal.org
http://www.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus