On 2006-03-14 16:21 EST, Jim Grandy wrote:
>
> On Mar 14, 2006, at 12:37 PM, P T Withington wrote:
>
>>> I think knowing the event dispatch frequency by name is more
>>> important than knowing event/sender pair frequencies. The latter
>>> still has some usefulness, though. Could I add a nested layer, so
>>> event/sender wraps event?
>>>
>>> call #button32.onclick
>>> call onclick
>>> return onclick
>>> return #button32.onclick
>>>
>>> Or would this be too verbose?
>>
>> You're call. I don't know what you are looking for here. But you
>> want the more specific 'call' inside the less specific, right?
>
> No, you want less inside more. Otherwise you add too many edges to
> the call graph -- the sender will often be the caller of sendEvent,
> so there's some correlation there.
Er, it's more that makes the additional edges, no matter where you
put it. If you put less inside, it won't coalesce, so you won't
learn anything more by recording it. If you put it outside, you
would get the total time for the event and also get it broken down by
individual sender.
+- event1 -- sender1.event1
/
sendEvent < +- sender1.event2
+- event2 <
+- sender2.event2
The 'sender' of an event is the object the event is on. It will
never be a caller of sendEvent (it's not a function), so you won't
see it unless you add some annotation.
> What I really want is to be able to get a read on, e.g., how many
> times "onWidth" is called during a given operation. I don't really
> care too much about sender for this. So I think I'll leave sender
> info out for now; it's easy enough to add in later.
That's why it is your call. I didn't know what you were trying to
figure out.
_______________________________________________
Laszlo-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.openlaszlo.org/mailman/listinfo/laszlo-dev
