On Tuesday 02 December 2003 04:13, Alexandre Julliard wrote: > Andrew de Quincey <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > However, if no one minds, I think I'll still implement the stuff I was > > doing. I found being able to examine the call tree with ballpark figures > > of how long was spent in each call was very invaluable. > > Note that the relay debugging adds a huge overhead, especially for > functions that call other parts of Wine, so adding precise timings in > there is pretty much useless. That may also explain why you get such > strange results.
I'm aware of that; I merely wanted them as figures showing which functions were were used the most. CharNextW specifically does not call any sub-functions, so will not generate any further delays by additional logging.
