[interfacekit] Re: BSession(NG)
- From: "Axel Dörfler" <axeld@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: interfacekit@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Thu, 06 May 2004 23:07:28 +0200 CEST
Adi Oanca <adioanca@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Axel Dörfler wrote:
> >>>Also, never split the message into two port calls.
> >>No. I'm sorry, I will never agree with you on this one!
> > Can you elaborate a bit on why you don't do that?
> > Doing 2 port writes of 1024 should be slower than doing 1 write of
> > 2048, no matter if you need to allocate the memory (or part of it)
> > first - and the problem should get worse the more parts the message
> > will have.
> :-)) This is fuuun.
> That's exactly the reason.
> "message" here was: BWindow/BView message (ex: AS_DRAW_LINE+x+y+x1+
> y1)
> not a port(system/kernel) message.
I don't understand you.
Bye,
Axel.
- Follow-Ups:
- [interfacekit] Re: BSession(NG)
- From: Adi Oanca
- References:
- [interfacekit] Re: BSession(NG)
- From: Adi Oanca
Other related posts:
- » [interfacekit] BSession(NG)
- » [interfacekit] Re: BSession(NG)
- » [interfacekit] Re: BSession(NG)
- » [interfacekit] Re: BSession(NG)
- » [interfacekit] Re: BSession(NG)
- » [interfacekit] Re: BSession(NG)
- » [interfacekit] Re: BSession(NG)
- » [interfacekit] Re: BSession(NG)
- » [interfacekit] Re: BSession(NG)
- » [interfacekit] Re: BSession(NG)
- » [interfacekit] Re: BSession(NG)
- » [interfacekit] Re: BSession(NG)
- » [interfacekit] Re: BSession(NG)
- » [interfacekit] Re: BSession(NG)
- » [interfacekit] Re: BSession(NG)
- » [interfacekit] Re: BSession(NG)
- » [interfacekit] Re: BSession(NG)
- » [interfacekit] Re: BSession(NG)
- » [interfacekit] Re: BSession(NG)
- » [interfacekit] Re: BSession(NG)
- » [interfacekit] Re: BSession(NG)
- » [interfacekit] Re: BSession(NG)
- » [interfacekit] Re: BSession(NG)
- » [interfacekit] Re: BSession(NG)
- » [interfacekit] Re: BSession(NG)
- [interfacekit] Re: BSession(NG)
- From: Adi Oanca
- [interfacekit] Re: BSession(NG)
- From: Adi Oanca