Re: [Texmacs-dev] TeXmacs profiling

[David MENTRE]

Hello David,

David Allouche <address@hidden> writes:

> For profiling you probably want to compile with at least _some_
> optimizations.

Yes. But as debug information is used, optimization can introduce some
error in gprof ouput.

> What are those test cases meant to measure?

In fact, I had no real goal. I just took some basic and compute
intensive tasks.  :) More seriously, I'm new to TeXmacs so my initial
post was to initiate some feedback and setup a test procedure that you
would agree with.

The main issue is that TeXmacs is an interactive editor, so it is
difficult to setup reproducable and scriptable test benches. I know that
texmacs can execute some scripts with -x switch, but I don't know in
practice how to simulate user typing or menu tear down.


> This profiling data is not helpful. It does not identify any bottleneck:
> no function takes more than about 4% time and the big functions are
> those which are called zillions of times because they are used all over
> the source code.

ok.

> If you care about performance, here are a couple of things which can
> be to improve performance and that the profiling did not show because
> they are _distributed_ fat.

>From previous results, I agree with you for the _distributed_ fat.

> Where you can make a difference are areas where theory and practice are
> different. I'm very curious to see cache profiling data for TeXmacs, I
> have always suspected that it spends most of its time in CPU cache
> faults.

See joint post.

Yours,
d.
-- 
 David Mentré <address@hidden>