Date:	Sat, 24 Feb 2001 16:27:32 +0200
From:	"Eli Zaretskii" <eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il>
Sender:	halo1 AT zahav DOT net DOT il
To:	Joe Wright <joewwright AT earthlink DOT net>
Message-Id:	<3405-Sat24Feb2001162732+0200-eliz@is.elta.co.il>
X-Mailer:	Emacs 20.6 (via feedmail 8.3.emacs20_6 I) and Blat ver 1.8.6
CC:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
In-reply-to:	<3A97BB6A.2E4C@earthlink.net> (message from Joe Wright on Sat, 24
	Feb 2001 13:45:50 GMT)
Subject:	Re: Now Slower?
References:	<3A97302F DOT 7561 AT earthlink DOT net> <3405-Sat24Feb2001100029+0200-eliz AT is DOT elta DOT co DOT il> <3A97BB6A DOT 2E4C AT earthlink DOT net>
Reply-To:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	djgpp AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

> From: Joe Wright <joewwright AT earthlink DOT net>
> Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp
> Date: Sat, 24 Feb 2001 13:45:50 GMT
> 
> Under 2.7.2.1 I produce a 49,152 byte .exe and with 2.952 67,584
> bytes.

Did you upgrade your library (i.e. djdevNNN.zip) as well?  If so, an
additional 18KB or so sounds reasonable: the new library has more
functionality at its core.  In addition, some functions, such as
`system', have grown significantly, but I don't know if you use them.

> I run the sort program in a DOS window on Win95.  The sort fills the
> screen with the array to be sorted.  With 2.7 this seems instantaneous.
> With 2.9 it is 'clunky'.  Of course the sorts don't take the same amount
> of time each time due to the random nature of the data to be sorted but
> one of my sorts takes about 1500 microseconds in 2.7 and 2200
> microseconds in 2.9.

This slow-down sounds too much.  Perhaps some code uses special tricks
which backfire with the new compiler.  Or maybe you use some library
functions which got slower (assuming you upgraded the library).
Profiling and more details about the program might help.

- Raw text -