Am 12.09.2010 18:24, schrieb Dimitri Smits: > > ----- "Marco van de Voort" <mar...@stack.nl> schreef: > >> I partially agree with you in the fact that the exact reasons are >> not known. >> >> I'm no expert on profiling the compiler, but if I read the various >> threads over the years I see defensive and conflicting statements: >> >> In discussions with Hans, it is said that I/O is not a factor, >> since after one run everything is cached anyway, and then in this >> thread I/O is to blame for a huge difference in speed. > > that may be the case for reading, not necessarily for the files being > written. in ppu.pas, everything you "put" results in a blockwrite of > x bytes. Wouldn't a cached memory stream be better, not resulting in > those int21h calls or windows equivalent calls?
The ppu writer uses a buffer of 16 kB which is enough. Believe me, it's no so simple as just use a memory stream to improve performance. If it's the case, we would have done it for years. _______________________________________________ fpc-devel maillist - fpc-devel@lists.freepascal.org http://lists.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/fpc-devel