Re: R: Octave Profiler experimental version]

[Muthiah Annamalai]

-------- Original Message --------
Subject:        Re: R: Octave Profiler experimental version
Date:   Sat, 09 Jan 2010 01:30:16 -0600
From:   Muthiah Annamalai <address@hidden>
To:     Riccardo Corradini <address@hidden>
CC:     John W. Eaton <address@hidden>, address@hidden
References:     <address@hidden>



Riccardo Corradini wrote:
> I would try even the "buggy" oldest one , then by doxygen I will make 
> a comparison between the old and newest version of octave.
> I would like to try anyway, but I need the whole patch, and to know 
> the version of octave synchronized with this.
> Thanks a lot
> Riccardo
>
> --- *Ven 8/1/10, John W. Eaton /<address@hidden>/* ha scritto:
>
>
>     Da: John W. Eaton <address@hidden>
>     Oggetto: Octave Profiler experimental version
>     A: "Riccardo Corradini" <address@hidden>
>     Cc: address@hidden, address@hidden
>     Data: Venerdì 8 gennaio 2010, 13:45
>
>     On 8-Jan-2010, Riccardo Corradini wrote:
>
>     | In Octave 's FAQ there is written:
>     | "Profiler Octave doesn’t have a profiler. Though there is a
>     patch for a flat profiler, that
>     | might become a real profiler sometime in the future. see the thread
>     |
>     
> http://www.cae.wisc.edu/pipermail/octave-maintainers/2007-January/001685.html
>     | for more details".
>     | Is it all right if I ask you how to apply a working patch for a
>     profiler to current development version 3.3.50+ ?. Could you
>     please post it again to the list?
>     | Thanks a lot for all your help and patience concerning this issue.
>
>     The interpreter has changed significantly since that patch was
>     posted so I think it would take a quite a bit of work to make it work
>     with the current sources.
>
>     jwe

Hello there,

The patch is found in the webpage : 
https://www-old.cae.wisc.edu/pipermail/octave-maintainers/2007-January/001693.html

I think you would have to revert your hg checkout of Octave to version 
as of Jan 2007
and add in all the changes at that point. I dont think it is a wise 
idea, but if youre
desperate to use a profiler on your code without the tic/toc strategy 
then go for it.

However, I think Octave project would benefit from a profiler written 
using the tree-walker
evaluator class, instead of the ugly patches contained in the 2007 
postings. I think there
is a new tree-walking evaluator in the octave tree, but I am not sure.

Thanks JWE & all, for the great work on GNU Octave with new releases 
following v3.2.

Best,
-Muthu