| To: | REALbasic NUG <realbasic-nug@lists.realsoftware.com> |
|---|---|
| Subject: | Re: OOP design question |
| From: | Norman Palardy <npalardy@great-white-software.com> |
| Date: | Thu, 31 Jul 2008 09:00:20 -0600 |
| Authentication-results: | mx.google.com; spf=neutral (google.com: 74.124.194.228 is neither permitted nor denied by best guess record for domain of realbasic-nug-bounces@lists.realsoftware.com) smtp.mail=realbasic-nug-bounces@lists.realsoftware.com |
| Delivered-to: | listarchive@realsoftware.com |
| In-reply-to: | <eb8fc1930807310740t454796aetf3ce4ac2ff4bb7b2@mail.gmail.com> |
| References: | <45482FD9-86C2-47DA-B62D-25BA4C9B3C96@edlr.fr> <BAY107-DAV7FDA9B842A0345CAC2594937C0@phx.gbl> <eb8fc1930807310740t454796aetf3ce4ac2ff4bb7b2@mail.gmail.com> |
| Reply-to: | REALbasic NUG <realbasic-nug@lists.realsoftware.com> |
| Sender: | realbasic-nug-bounces@lists.realsoftware.com |
On 31-Jul-08, at 8:40 AM, dda wrote: If it was Erlang, I'd say go ahead and create a process per frame, and you'll see tremendous speed, especially with multicore machines. But as Norm points out RB is not thread safe, and only uses once core. So you're probably stuck with optimizing your processing code :-) Spin up one helper per frame and make as many as you want You should be able to use 100% of every CPU doing this :) _______________________________________________ Unsubscribe or switch delivery mode: <http://www.realsoftware.com/support/listmanager/> Search the archives: <http://support.realsoftware.com/listarchives/lists.html> |
| <Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
|---|---|---|
| ||
| Previous by Date: | Re: Best way to handle loss of ResourceFork, Norman Palardy |
|---|---|
| Next by Date: | Re: Best way to handle loss of ResourceFork, Don Jungk |
| Previous by Thread: | Re: OOP design question, dda |
| Next by Thread: | Re: OOP design question, Eric de La Rochette |
| Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |