Article View: comp.sys.powerpc
Article #3120Re: Debate: PowerMac "trounces" Pentium....???
From: Timothy A. Seufert
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 1996 23:50
Date: Wed, 07 Feb 1996 23:50
48 lines
3400 bytes
3400 bytes
In article <nevin-0602962253080001@150.135.1.79>, nevin@CS.Arizona.EDU (Nevin ":-]" Liber) wrote: >So, you can't figure out how to get this to work well on a Mac, eh? >Hmmmm... <in deep thought for 4.2 seconds> How about putting a >WaitNextEvent() call in one of the inner loops of >do_the_computationally_intensive_useful_work();? > >Is this really rocket science for you, Kevin? I doubt it's rocket science for him. However, WaitNextEvent() is not a panacaea. The true advantage of PMT in this respect is that it works well automatically with no effort by the app programmer. With CMT, the programmer has to ensure that the processor is released at reasonable time intervals. If you aren't careful about how much processing you do between calls to WaitNextEvent(), you can end up sucking down all the system's CPU time or getting nearly none at all. Worse, every time you add something to an algorithm, or optimize it, or do anything at all that changes how fast it executes, you have to retune your WaitNextEvent() calling frequency. If you want to do it in a generally correct way, you have to start looking into Time Manager calls so that you can check how many milliseconds have passed since the last call. Now you've got some inefficiency from calling the Time Manager, and you've easily gotten into a realm that the scientific programmer isn't interested in figuring out at all... Mind you, I like the Mac and the MacOS, but I view its lack of preemptive multitasking and memory protection as obvious and glaring weaknesses. Trying to bury your head in the sand by ignoring the very real difficulties for the application programmer under CMT doesn't make the problem go away. If you're a scientist who wants to whip out a quick little program that does some matrix ops on some rather _large_ data sets (say, multiple megabytes), while still being able to word process in the foreground without difficulty, the MacOS is much harder to use than UNIX. Under UNIX, you write the processing algorithm, compile it, fire it up, and go off to do whatever floats your boat while your code grinds away. Under MacOS, you write the processing algorithm, try to figure out a good way to stick in the WaitNextEvent() calls, spend at least a half-hour fiddling with it to get good responsiveness from foreground apps, and then go off to work on other things. +-----------------------------------------------------------+ |Tim Seufert, bwanga@cats.ucsc.edu | UselessWastedSpace(tm) | | "I never give them hell. I just tell the truth, and they | | think it is hell." -Harry S Truman | +-----------------------------------------------------------+
Technical Details
Message-ID:
<bwanga-0702961550230001@metricom12.ucsc.edu>Path:
arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!metricom12.ucsc.edu!userReferences:
<4csn1n$klb@macshack.com> <jragosta-2601961539320001 <19960201.11A2980.E21F@olympus.net> <nevin-0302960411460001@150.135.1.79> <kevinbDMCMIy.B26@netcom.com> <nevin-0602962253080001@150.135.1.79>Show Full Headers
Complete Article Headers
Path: arc1-ca.pugleaf.net!metricom12.ucsc.edu!user From: bwanga@cats.ucsc.edu (Timothy A. Seufert) Newsgroups: comp.sys.powerpc,comp.os.linux.advocacy,comp.sys.mac.advocacy,comp.os.os2.advocacy,comp.sys.amiga.advocacy,comp.sys.intel Subject: Re: Debate: PowerMac "trounces" Pentium....??? Date: Wed, 07 Feb 1996 15:50:23 -0800 Organization: Evil Geniuses For A Better Tomorrow Message-ID: <bwanga-0702961550230001@metricom12.ucsc.edu> References: <4csn1n$klb@macshack.com> <jragosta-2601961539320001 <19960201.11A2980.E21F@olympus.net> <nevin-0302960411460001@150.135.1.79> <kevinbDMCMIy.B26@netcom.com> <nevin-0602962253080001@150.135.1.79> NNTP-Posting-Host: metricom12.ucsc.edu