Re: Carbon is C++?
Re: Carbon is C++?
- Subject: Re: Carbon is C++?
- From: Erik Buck <email@hidden>
- Date: Sun, 28 Feb 2010 23:55:50 -0500
On Feb 28, 2010, at 10:49 PM, David Rowland wrote:
>
> On Feb 28, 2010, at 7:24 PM, Erik Buck wrote:
>
>> I disagree. I have written very low latency device drivers in Objective-C. Why do you think Objective-C has too much "latency" for audio? When properly used, Objective-C programs are no more likely to be preempted than any other kind of program. Message dispatch generally has constant time and is only 2.5 times the cost of a C function call.
>
> That just cannot be true. But if you need speed you can write a direct C style subroutine and call, and it will be swift. The dynamic binding of ObC messages often isn't needed.
http://www.mikeash.com/pyblog/performance-comparisons-of-common-operations-leopard-edition.html
http://www.friday.com/bbum/2009/12/18/objc_msgsend-part-1-the-road-map/
http://ridiculousfish.com/blog/archives/2005/08/01/objc_msgsend/
http://www.mulle-kybernetik.com/artikel/Optimization/
See gcc option -fobjc-direct-dispatch
Interesting research: http://www.jot.fm/issues/issue_2009_01/article4/
>
>
>> There aren't many function calls or messages sent in audio processing anyway. Signal processing routines tend to be long loops. Objective-C _IS_ C which means it is likely usable in any situation where C is usable.
>>
>>
>
_______________________________________________
Cocoa-dev mailing list (email@hidden)
Please do not post admin requests or moderator comments to the list.
Contact the moderators at cocoa-dev-admins(at)lists.apple.com
Help/Unsubscribe/Update your Subscription:
This email sent to email@hidden