[racket] big-bang is slow to render on screen?

My version of Cairo is 2.11000.2. What's yours, Sean?
(probably: ls /usr/lib/i386-linux-gnu/libcairo.so*)


On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 4:51 PM, Robby Findler
<robby at eecs.northwestern.edu>wrote:

> If the versions of Cairo are the same, then that eliminates one
> possible route of inquiry.
>
> Robby
>
> On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 9:45 AM, Laurent <laurent.orseau at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Thanks Sean.
> > (I forgot to mention that I was testing on Racket 6.0.1.4).
> > Apparently it does not lag on your machine, so it might be particular to
> my
> > machine then? Strange.
> >
> >
> > On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 4:32 PM, Sean Kanaley <skanaley at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Here's my log after pasting the source into command-line racket 6.0,
> >> Ubuntu 12.04 32-bit:
> >>
> >> to-draw at 1649
> >>
> >> to-draw: cpu time: 0 real time: 2 gc time: 0
> >> on-key a at 2934
> >> to-draw at 2934
> >>
> >> to-draw: cpu time: 0 real time: 2 gc time: 0
> >> on-key s at 2970
> >> to-draw at 2970
> >>
> >> to-draw: cpu time: 4 real time: 3 gc time: 0
> >> on-key d at 3044
> >> on-key f at 3044
> >> to-draw at 3045
> >>
> >> to-draw: cpu time: 0 real time: 0 gc time: 0
> >> to-draw at 3069
> >> to-draw: cpu time: 0 real time: 1 gc time: 0
> >> on-key a at 3198
> >> on-key s at 3198
> >> to-draw at 3199
> >>
> >> to-draw: cpu time: 4 real time: 3 gc time: 0
> >> to-draw at 3329
> >>
> >> to-draw: cpu time: 4 real time: 1 gc time: 0
> >> to-draw at 3392
> >> to-draw: cpu time: 0 real time: 1 gc time: 0
> >> on-key g at 3430
> >> on-key j at 3430
> >> on-key k at 3430
> >> to-draw at 3430
> >>
> >> to-draw: cpu time: 4 real time: 1 gc time: 0
> >> to-draw at 3467
> >> to-draw: cpu time: 0 real time: 1 gc time: 0
> >> on-key a at 3504
> >> on-key l at 3504
> >> to-draw at 3505
> >>
> >> to-draw: cpu time: 0 real time: 1 gc time: 0
> >> to-draw at 3547
> >>
> >> to-draw: cpu time: 4 real time: 1 gc time: 0
> >> to-draw at 3572
> >> to-draw: cpu time: 0 real time: 1 gc time: 0
> >> on-key h at 3602
> >> to-draw at 3602
> >> to-draw: cpu time: 0 real time: 1 gc time: 0
> >> on-key k at 3659
> >> on-key ; at 3659
> >> to-draw at 3659
> >>
> >> to-draw: cpu time: 4 real time: 3 gc time: 0
> >> to-draw at 3689
> >>
> >> to-draw: cpu time: 0 real time: 1 gc time: 0
> >> to-draw at 3725
> >>
> >> to-draw: cpu time: 0 real time: 1 gc time: 0
> >> to-draw at 3776
> >> to-draw: cpu time: 0 real time: 1 gc time: 0
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 10:00 AM, Laurent <laurent.orseau at gmail.com>
> >> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I have a 2htdp/universe program that used to run fast enough a few
> months
> >>> ago, but now it is very slow and not usable.
> >>> The slowness seems to be because of the on-screen rendering, and not
> >>> because of the generation of the image.
> >>>
> >>> Here is a stripped-down version that shows this behavior:
> >>> https://gist.github.com/Metaxal/11142941
> >>>
> >>> In the following log, you see that the `on-key` events are very close
> one
> >>> to the other (in milliseconds after the beginning of the program), but
> the
> >>> corresponding `to-draw` events are separated by more than a second,
> even
> >>> though generating the image (cpu time) takes almost no time:
> >>>
> >>> on-key a at 6906
> >>> on-key u at 6912
> >>> on-key i at 6912
> >>> on-key e at 6913
> >>> to-draw at 6913
> >>> to-draw: cpu time: 4 real time: 3 gc time: 0
> >>> to-draw at 8598
> >>> to-draw: cpu time: 4 real time: 2 gc time: 0
> >>> to-draw at 11948
> >>> to-draw: cpu time: 4 real time: 2 gc time: 0
> >>> to-draw at 13631
> >>> to-draw: cpu time: 0 real time: 2 gc time: 0
> >>> to-draw at 161839
> >>> to-draw: cpu time: 4 real time: 9 gc time: 0
> >>>
> >>> During those long seconds, Xorg is almost at 100% cpu.
> >>>
> >>> However, using an empty scene instead of an image is fast.
> >>> The time also depends on the size of the grid.
> >>>
> >>> I'm using Ubuntu 12.04 64bits.
> >>> I have tried to replicate the behavior on older versions of racket
> (5.3.1
> >>> and 5.90.0.9) but it's the same. So maybe the problem is not on
> Racket's
> >>> side but something has changed in Ubuntu?
> >>>
> >>> Does anyone else see the same behavior, either on the same platform or
> on
> >>> a different one?
> >>>
> >>> Thanks,
> >>> Laurent
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> ____________________
> >>>   Racket Users list:
> >>>   http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
> >>>
> >>
> >
> >
> > ____________________
> >   Racket Users list:
> >   http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/attachments/20140421/5e167534/attachment-0001.html>