Message-ID: <387DD5C4.5B15214@ou.edu> From: David Cleaver X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.7 [en] (Win98; I) X-Accept-Language: en MIME-Version: 1.0 Newsgroups: comp.os.msdos.djgpp Subject: Re: Question on a profiled program... References: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Lines: 17 Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 07:40:20 -0600 NNTP-Posting-Host: 129.15.140.115 X-Complaints-To: usenet AT ou DOT edu X-Trace: news.ou.edu 947770751 129.15.140.115 (Thu, 13 Jan 2000 07:39:11 CST) NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 13 Jan 2000 07:39:11 CST Organization: The University of Oklahoma To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com DJ-Gateway: from newsgroup comp.os.msdos.djgpp Reply-To: djgpp AT delorie DOT com Hello, > Caveat: __umoddi3 is only relevant for operations on "long long" data > type (64-bit integers). Do you have such variables in your program, > and if so, do they participate in the intensive part of your code? Yes, my program does have these size variables, and yes they do participate in the intensive part of my code. > In any case, no function should ever take 100% percent of the CPU > time. If that's what the profile says, you are looking at a known bug > in DJGPP v2.02; upgrade to v2.03. It only took 60% of the total run time. I've already upgraded, thank you for the input though. Have a nice day! :) -David C.