On 08/29/2014 02:58 PM, Tobias Doerffel wrote: > First of all, thanks for the implementation! It looks very promising > and I like the macro/memory operator overload approach. > > 2014-08-22 20:20 GMT+02:00 Vesa <[email protected]>: >> Early results seem promising... I think I can notice some performance >> improvement, although haven't done any real benchmarking (not going to >> bother either, but if anyone wants to that'd be nice). > A good test case usually is to render a reference project at the > command line and measure the consumed and elapsed CPU time using the > "time" command. You should be able to measure notable improvements. > For small improvements oprofile could be an option even though it's a > little bit harder to set up. > > Besides this it's probably harder to measure improved RT capabilities. > We could use the timer which is used for the CPU meter already to > profile the elapsed time for each mixer period and write the results > into a CSV file. Plotting the different CSV files could/should reveal > differences.
Sounds like a project for someone... Someone who wants to help LMMS development, but is unfamiliar with C++/our codebase... here's a good opportunity! ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Slashdot TV. Video for Nerds. Stuff that matters. http://tv.slashdot.org/ _______________________________________________ LMMS-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/lmms-devel
