On Monday 01 December 2003 20:33, Dimitrie O. Paun wrote: > On December 1, 2003 03:26 pm, Alexandre Julliard wrote: > > That's not possible, such a simple function cannot take 168us, unless > > you have a 1Mhz CPU... How did you measure it? > > I think he measured it across the call: > > start > CharNextW > end > > but it still doesn't add up. If his measurement is correct, we certainly > have a high (it's an understatement, IIRC a syscall on Linux is on the > order of a few us) call overhead. Maybe a bit of disassembly might help, > but I can't imagine what could have gone wrong in such a trivial of a case.
I'm really distrustful of those results; something very weird seemed to happen during that test. I will re-run it again and let you know.
