widget style cleanup
elcuco at kdemail.net
Tue Sep 14 09:34:16 BST 2004
Lets do some benchmarks...
here are the results for keramik in my box:
and here are the results for plastik:
The box is a AMD 2.5 with 512MB RAM. KDE from branch compiled on debian
Plastik is a little slower, so what, it still rocks.
ביום שלישי, 14 בספטמבר 2004, 08:11, נכתב על ידי Maksim Orlovich:
> >> You're getting ahead of yourself, but no problem w/the move itself.
> >> However, plastik needs some performance work.
> > To be honest, I didn't notice these general performance problems.
> I am not sure they're noticeable, they're easily measurable.
> > So if you could help me identifying them, I would love trying to improve
> > this situation.
> Please see the attached .cpp file; apologies for the uglyness, not meant
> to be any sort of production code. This is basically what I used to tune
> keramik --- it just hammers on PE_ButtonCommand which for Ker hits the
> core rendering path -- and I think Plastik is similar with its bevel
> rendering accessible from here and occuring all over the place (please
> correct me if I am wrong)
> Here, when I run this with Keramik, I get it finishing in 26.5 seconds, of
> which 15.5 are in-process (that's the "clock:" line, the portions is -way-
> too high, likely due to all the temporary TilePainter objects; I hope
> nextgen designs I do can eliminate that; hard to do w/the current
> codebase). Light3 comes in at much quicker 9.2 seconds... Plastik takes
> 200 seconds to run this app here, with 88 in-process, which is 7.5 times
> slower than keramik, and 21.7 times slower than Light3. A candidate for a
> drag on speed are all the save()/restore() calls, but I am not sure: for
> some reason I recall these functions as being slow, but I don't have a
שנה טובה ומתוקה!
diego, kde-il translation team, http://www.kde.org/il
Please avoid sending me Word or PowerPoint attachments.
More information about the kde-core-devel